Towards Trustworthy Elections pp 175-190

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6000) | Cite as

On Optical Mark-Sense Scanning

  • Douglas W. Jones

Abstract

Optical mark-sense scanning has lead to a resurgence in the use of paper ballots in the United States, despite a century of strong competition from paperless direct-recording voting systems. By the time mark-sense technology emerged, procedural measures had been developed to counter most of the vulnerabilities of paper ballots. Automatic counting of paper ballots poses technical and legal problems, but by counting the paper ballots automatically in the presence of the voter, mark-sense systems address some of the remaining problems with paper ballots. The best current technology uses precinct-count optical scanners to capture pixelized images of each ballot and then process the marks on that image. While this technology may be among the best voting technologies available today for the conduct of complex general elections, it faces one significant problem, access to voters with disabilities. There are promising solutions to this problem, but work remains to be done.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    AIS Model 100 Precinct Ballot Scanner Operator’s Manual, Version Release 2.1, American Information Systems (August 1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ballot Now Intelligent Ballot Management, Hart InterCivic (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    The Electoral Act of 1856, Victoria, Australia (1856)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Procedures at a General Election, British Department for Constitutional Affairs, August 17, 2001. Paragraphs 11.14 through 11.18 (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Official Ballot General Election, Clay County Iowa, November 7 (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    The Help America Vote Act of 2002, Public Law 107-252, 107th Congress, Title III, Sec 301(a)1(A) (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Minutes of Examination and Test, Board of Examiners for Voting Machines and Electronic Voting Systems, Iowa Secretary of State, October 17 (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Manual Audit Requirements, Verified Voting Foundation, November 1 (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Determining the Validity of Optical Scan Ballot Markings, State of Michigan Department of State, July 18 (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Managing the Scottish Parliamentary and local government elections guidance for Returning Officers, UK Electoral Commission, Section F, 3, pp. 181–186 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vote-PAD (Voting-on-Paper Assistive Device) - Independent Voting for People with Disabilities, Vote-PAD Inc. (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Performance and Test Standards for Punchcard, Marksense, and Direct Recording Electronic Voting Systems, Federal Election Commission, Section 3.2.5.2.1 (Janaury 1990)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Contract between Fidlar & Chambers Co. and the Surry County Board of Commissioners, Surry County, North Carolina, Janaury 26 (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    U.S. Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit, December 6, 2000, Touchston and Shepperd vs. Michael McDermott, No. 00-15985 (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Voluntary Voting System Guidelines, U.S. Election Assistance Commission (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Voting Machines, Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th edn., vol. 28 (1910)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Voting System Performance and Test Standards, Federal Election Commission, vol. I, Section 3.2.4.2.3 (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ackerman, S.J.: The Vote that Failed, Smithsonian (November 1998)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Adi, A., Adi, W.: Demonstration of Open Counting: A Paper-Assisted Voting System with Public OMR-At-A-Distance Counting. In: VoComp 2007, Portland, Oregon, July 17 (2007)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Arnold, E.G.: History of Voting Systems in California, California Secretary of State Bill Jones (June 1999)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Berghoefer, F.: Transcript of oral testimony, Technical Guidelines Development Committee Public Data Gathering Hearings, September 20 (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bolton, S., Cordes, T., Deutsch, H.: Method of Analyzing Marks Made on a Response Sheet, U.S., February 15 (2005) Patent 6,854,644Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Brace, K.W.: Overview of Voting Equipment Usage in United States, Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) Voting, statement to the United States Election Assistance Commission, May 5 (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chung, K.K., Dong, V.J., Shi, X.: Electronic Voting Method for Optically Scanned Ballot, U.S., July 18 (2006) Patent 7,077,313Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cummings, E.M.: Ballot Marking System and Apparatus, U.S., July 25 (2006) Patent 7,080,779Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Davidson, A., Ricks, S.: Tactile Ballot for the Visually Impaired of Marion County, Oregon, Appendix C of Independent, Secret and Verifiable - A guide to Making Voting an Independent and Accessible Process for People who are Blind and Visually Impaired, American Council for the Blind (September 2002)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dwan, A.: Paper Complexity and the Interpretation of Conservation Research. Journal of the American Institute for Conservation 26(1), 1–17 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Charles Fogg, M., Krieger, C.F., Veale, J.R.: System and Method for Reading Marks on a Document, U.S., October 23 (1984) Patent 4,479,194Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Harris, J.P.: Election Administration in the United States. The Brookings Institution (1934)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Harris, J.P.: Data Registering Device, U.S., August 17 (1965) Patents 3,201,038, March 15 (1966) 3,240,409Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Holzer, G., Walker, N., Wilcock, H.: Vote Tallying Machine, U.S., November 16 (1965) Patent 3,218,439Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jones, D.W.: Auditing Elections. Comm. ACM 47(10), 46–50 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jones, D.W.: Observations and Recommendations on Pre-election Testing in Miami-Dade County, September 9 (2004)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jones, D.W.: Regarding the Optical Mark-Sense Vote Tabulators in Maricopa County, statement submitted to the Arizona Senate Government and Accountability Committee, Janaury 12 (2006)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Jones, D.W.: System for Handicapped Access to Voting Ballots, U.S., November 14 (2006) Patent 7,134,579Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Keith, H.R.: Electrical Vote Counting Machine, U.S., June 12 (1956) Patent 2,750,108Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    McKay, R.H., Ziebold, P.G., Kirby, J.D., Hetzel, D.R., Snydacker, J.U.: Electronic Voting Machine, U.S., February 19 (1974) Patent 3,793,505Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Moloney, M.A.: Mechanized Vote Recording: A Survey, Research Report No. 116, Legislative Research Commission, Frankfort Kentucky (May 1975)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Narey, J.O.: Ballot for use in Automatic Tallying Apparatus and Menthod for Producing Ballot, U.S., March 21 (1989) Patent 4,813,708Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Narey, J.O., Saylor, W.H.: Ballot Tallying System Including a Digital Programmable Read-Only Control Memory, a Digital Ballot Image Memory and a Digital Totals Memory, U.S. Patent 4,021,780Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Saltman, R.G.: Accuracy, Integrity, and Security in Computerized Vote-Tallying, NBS Special Publication 500-158, National Bureau of Standards (August 1988)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Spratt, H.W.: Improvement in Voting Apparatus, U.S., Janaury 12 (1875) Patent 158,562Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Stewart, J.D.: Device for Optically Reading Marked Ballots using Infrared and Red Emitters, U.S., September 28 (1993) Patent 5,248,872Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Weik, M.H.: A Third Survey of Domestic Electronic Digital Computing Systems, Ballistic Research Laboratories Report No. 1115, pp. 719–723 (March 1961)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wood, F.S.: Electric Voting-Machine, U.S., December 20 (1898) Patent 616,174Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    David Zuckerman, T.: The Voting Machine. Political Research Bureau of the Republican County Committee of New York (Janaury 1925)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Douglas W. Jones
    • 1
  1. 1.University of IowaIowa CityUSA

Personalised recommendations