TennesseeTicket.com

Here in Hamilton County, we're shielded from the battle. For whatever reason, when the rest of the state adopted digital recording electronic (DRE) machines of one type or another, our local officials opted for (or to keep) an optical scan system. Yes, there have been problems, like the time rats peed all over the modems and delayed election night results, and when a batch of ballots had to be reprinted--twice--due to errors. But optical scan is all the rage now, and we should feel lucky that we (along with tiny Pickett County on the Kentucky border) are ahead of the game.

Elsewhere (and Nashville is naturally the hot spot), temperatures are rising over the possibility that Tennessee voters could go another election cycle without a verifiable ballot. The Legislature passed the Tennessee Voter Confidence Act in 2008, which mandated "paper ballots with optical scan voting machines" by November of next year. The aforementioned Secretary of State, former House Minority Leader Tre Hargett, says that's nigh impossible to do.

There is an oft-quoted saying in my line of work (and I'm sure in yours as well): "There are three possible components to getting a job done: Good, Fast, and Cheap. You can only ever have two out of the three." Secretary Hargett seems to be down to only one of these options. He wants the General Assembly to delay implementation of the act; yet he also acknowledges that the costs associated with the change are prohibitive. That leaves "Good": in a Q&A document issued recently, Hargett says "Anything worth doing is worth doing right. And it makes more sense to take the time necessary to get the best quality equipment rather than settle...."

On Facebook, a group called "Tennessee Wants Secure and Verifiable Elections" has asked its members to write opinion letters to the media stating their opposition to what they regard as stalling tactics by Secretary of State Hargett, and asking that the Voter Confidence Act be implemented as required.

Who is right? How quickly (or not) can this be done?

Here's something you, my faithful and intrepid readers, can help me with: finding out how many Tennessee counties were using optical scan technology before they (almost) all went fully digital, only a few years ago. Another task: find out who lobbied for the digital switch, and who has now lobbied for optical scan. I hate to be so cynical, but I doubt altruistic activists have been the chief (or chiefly listened to) proponents.

There is a lot of election machine-buying going on here, and there undoubtedly will be again very soon, as further federal mandates come into effect. (Incidentally, those 2012 mandates help make the argument for a delay. I'm just saying. Two years, and then switch/upgrade them all again? More on that later.) The real winners in this saga appear to be voting machine manufacturers, and, at some point, a contingent of lawyers.

Chief among the losers here are the large number of independent voters in Tennessee. Speaking only for myself, I submit that we independents don't so much care which party rules the election commission roost, just so long as elections are conducted accurately. While I do, unquestionably, want a verifiable vote, I wonder about the motives on all sides of this. It seems like some are in this fight just to score personal merit badges and move up in esteem within their respective political parties. The election process should not fall victim to partisan politics.

More:

Liberadio(!)

Andy Sher of the Chattanooga Times Free Press