Ohio’s primary election is tomorrow, and our reporters have investigated the issues and candidates to help you be an informed voter. From the battle for the White House to school tax issues, we’re covering Election 2012 like no other news team.
@@facebook=
@@
Counties across Ohio could save millions of dollars by requiring voters to use paper ballots instead of touch-screen voting machines, a Dayton Daily News analysis of a state audit has found.
A recent state audit of Butler County contends that the county could save more than $4.5 million over five years by making the switch.
Butler, the state’s eighth largest county, is one of 52 counties that uses touch-screen, ATM-like machines. Others include Montgomery, Greene, Miami and Darke.
Following the same math used for the Butler County audit, Montgomery County possibly could save $5.5 million over five years, and Greene County nearly $1.4 million.
Former Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner said many counties thought they would save money by using touch-screen systems, but “are finding that because of changes in the law or the practical effect of maintaining a touch-screen system, they may have been better off going with a paper ballot system.”
Others disagree.
Montgomery County Board of Elections Deputy Director Steve Harsman called the state auditor’s findings “absolutely unscientific and unfactual.”
The audit cites several potential positives to using paper. One is that every county in Ohio already operates a paper ballot system. A law change in 2005 allows Ohio voters to vote absentee for any reason, which is done on paper ballots and has steadily increased in popularity.
Also, a 2009 legal settlement with the League of Women Voters requires polling places to have paper ballots on hand in case they are needed. This means boards of elections still have to pay to print ballots — for 10 percent of the expected turnout to use — and all counties have to have paper ballot counters, called “optical scan machines.”
A 2005 North Carolina study found that touch-screen machines are more expensive and require more maintenance. The study also found that it takes 20 touch-screen machines to do the work of one optical scan machine.
That study, the Butler County audit notes, said the cost of running an election was 30-40 percent higher in counties using touch-screen machines than optical scan. Butler County’s board of elections saw a 33 percent increase in administrative costs since they started using touch-screen machines, according to the audit. Based on this, the auditor estimated Butler County could save $905,000 a year.
Montgomery County uses the same system. So by using the same formula, it could save $1.1 million a year.
Auditor’s Office Spokeswoman Carrie Bartunek stressed that the audit was specific to Butler County and that her office is not advocating counties to change voting systems.
“From our perspective, we look at things within a performance audit from a dollars-and-cents point of view and the decision on a voting machine would be ... a management decision as well,” she said. “We are not saying this is the final answer.”
The audit, however, says “studies have shown that transferring to optical scan machines from ... touch-screen machines increases voter confidence, reduces administrative and equipment costs and eliminates the need to estimate the number of back-up paper ballots necessary.”
If Butler county can’t afford a full replacement, it suggests buying at least enough to cover special elections.
Montgomery County deputy skeptical
Harsman calls the auditor’s office math “far-fetched.”
“I’m not convinced as a large county I could save any money switching to paper,” he said. “In fact, I would believe, based on my experience, I might be able to save some on the front end but cost more on the back end because of the risks having to do with paper.”
Chief among those risks is the difficulty in reading poorly filled out ballots: someone uses a check mark instead of filling in the bubble, or fills in a bubble then changes their mind.
“They put their initials by one and ‘X’ it out. Does that mean they voted yes for that or no for that? Determining voter intent is a nightmare,” Harsman said. “(Touch-screen) does not allow you to over-vote. You can only vote for the amount to be collected.”
It takes two workers — one Democrat and one Republican — 5 to 10 minutes to remake a paper ballot if it gets messed up.
“There’s so many different little things that go into it ... that’s an extreme cost to remake a ballot,” Harsman said.
“After using paper ballots for the last 6 or 7 years I’m an even bigger believer that touch-screen voting is still the better decision, especially for large counties.
“Even if the state would give me the money to switch to all paper, there’s absolutely no way, in any way, shape or form we could cut ($1 million) from our budget.”
State rules require one touch-screen voting machine for every 175 voters at a precinct. Paper ballots require at least one optical scan machine per precinct.
Montgomery County uses 2,173 touch-screen machines in the average election for its 360 precincts.
A Daily News analysis of county budgets and voting trends shows no clear correlation between voting systems and the average cost per vote.
Montgomery County spent $12.53 per vote cast running its Board of Elections in 2010, compared to $20.18 per vote in Hamilton County, which uses a paper-based system and had 100,000-plus more voters.
That same year, Clark County — which uses paper ballots — had 90,567 votes cast in four elections at a cost of $8.12 per ballot, the analysis found. Greene County had two elections and processed 84,985 ballots at a cost of $12.53 apiece.
The state audit found Butler County’s cost-per-vote had climbed since the introduction of touch-screen ballots to $16.29 per vote in 2010. The audit also found Butler’s elections office cost more than twice per vote than similar counties with similar equipment.
Savings offset by cost of machines
Butler County’s state audit also noted that the elections board had estimates in hand for switching to optical scan machines for between $2.4 million and $3.6 million. This means the county could potentially save more than $2 million over five years even after buying new equipment.
Butler County Elections Director Jocelyn Bucaro said that there is no money in the budget for such an initial purchase.
“We don’t plan to make any changes in the near term,” she said. “Fiscally it’s not feasible.”
She said the county at some point will have to replace its 7-year-old machines. And the industry is starting to favor paper ballots.
“I don’t believe the savings will be as significant as was cited in the audit report,” Bucaro said. “I think there could be some savings. While I see benefit to a paper-based optical scan system, I also see detriment with excess cost, excess storage capacity.”
Ohio’s boards of elections bought their equipment with more than $100 million in federal money set aside after the nation tried to avoid a repeat of Florida’s hanging-chad controversy in 2000.
In 2008, Florida switched all of its counties that were using touch-screen ballots to a paper-based system because of confidence concerns.
The Butler County audit noted that a study by Miami-Dade County, Florida’s largest, said that even after buying $10 million in new machines it could save more than $13.21 million over five years because of lower operating costs.
A matter of taste
Secretary of State Jon Husted, Ohio’s election chief, believes the purchase of voting equipment should be a local decision, as long as the machines meet state standards, according to his spokesman, Matt McClellan.
“There are a number of factors that counties have to consider when they’re determining what voting machines system is going to be best for them,” McClellan said. “Most of them are local decisions, not least of which is the management of local resources. So it really comes down to the county and what system is best for them.”
Husted was Speaker of the House in 2008 when Brunner unsuccessfully called for the General Assembly to allocate $31 million to replace touch-screen machines with optical scan ballots in the counties that use touch-screens.
“With optical scan paper ballots it’s a little bit easier to contain the risk of tampering than some of the touch-screen technology,” she said.
For this reason, Brunner also doesn’t support standardizing voting machines across the state. Ohio’s 88 counties use six different systems.
“If you have one system used all over the state there would be a greater chance you would be able to tamper with that system than if you have this diversity of systems that meet the needs of localized people,” she said.
Using the same system likely would save money, though.
“It would certainly make administration of election processes more standardized, but that’s not what we have right now,” Hamilton County Board of Elections Director Sally Krisel said.
If they do standardize, Krisel would push for paper.
“For us, six years into it, it just seems like common sense,” she said, noting that its tangible quality gives voters confidence. “Paper makes us feel good.”
She said her county has been able to bring down the biggest cost of paper ballots by increasingly printing in-house. This brings the cost per-page from more than 20 cents to less than 7 cents, she said. But beyond cost, the decision is a personal one.
“Our voters really like the touch-screen units for the most part,” said Butler County’s Bucaro.
Contact this reporter at (937) 328-0374.
About the Author
