California just enacted a new law (AB 969) that limits hand-counting of paper ballots to only the smallest jurisdictions, whether the ballots are marked electronically or by hand. Given the quality, security and efficiency of modern voting systems, this is the kind of approach that all voting jurisdictions across the United States should emulate. In this day and age, relying only on hand counts is unrealistic and a recipe for disaster for democracy.
Despite what some conspiracy theorists believe, hand counting ballots is not only insecure, but also achingly slow and incredibly costly, especially for ballots with multiple races. Hand-counting — which is a highly tedious, repetitive task — is also less accurate than electronic tabulation, a finding supported by several scholarly reports.
In fact, the use of paper ballots has a long history of contributing to weaker election systems that are easier to attack. Without a separate, corroborating accounting of the vote, hand-counted paper ballots can be destroyed, tampered with, manipulated, intercepted, lost or forged. And hand counting is highly susceptible to human error. Moreover, election officials are faced with mandatory results reporting deadlines, making strict reliance on hand counting virtually impossible.
It is important to note that paper ballots do have a very important role when used in auditing and recounts, providing additional proof that automated voting processes are secure and accurate. In other words, both hand-counted audits and technology’s redundant systems are checks on each other.
In several races, including Wisconsin’s 2011 Supreme Court election recount and 2016 presidential election recount, as well as an analysis of New Hampshire’s recounts, the ballots that were counted using electronic scanners were closer to the recounted totals.
A recent report by the Bipartisan Policy Center that compared machine tabulation to hand counts concluded that the latest election technology provides for the greatest efficiency, accuracy, and trustworthiness. It enables checkpoints throughout the many phases of the election process where election administrators and observers — whether neutral or partisan — can verify the veracity of the system, from source code review to registration to voting to tabulation and others.
Well-designed electronic voting systems combine multiple layers of security and control mechanisms that guarantee the integrity and confidentiality of the information generated throughout the election process. They also provide the necessary tools to audit and validate the legitimacy of the vote.
Still, a massive disinformation campaign claiming the 2020 elections were “rigged” clearly damaged voter confidence. A Gallup poll from October 2022 reports that only 63% of Americans are very or somewhat confident in election accuracy, which is to be expected given the disinformation campaign.
From the smallest jurisdiction to the biggest, modern technology is imperative to meeting society’s high expectations for the administration of elections:
• On security, we want the ballots and the results to be tamper-proof.
• We want accuracy — one person/one vote and that all ballots are counted and reported accurately.
• Speed is important — we want results fast. We get preliminary results from initial counts and estimates from news organizations, but certified results can take weeks or months. And there are legally-mandated reporting deadlines that must be met. This is achievable only through electronic counting.
• Accessibility — we want every voter to have the opportunity to vote regardless of ability or other limitations such as geography, transportation, child care or other encumbrances.
• Transparency helps ensure checks on systems and people. Comprehensive communication is key to ensuring that voters have all the necessary and correct information.
• Auditability is a key element of trust — we want the ability to be able to audit any election. That’s where paper ballots play an important role. On top of all that, voters want the process to be simple.
Today’s electronic elections systems meet and even exceed these goals.
All states should follow California’s lead by adopting new election laws that limit hand-counting to small jurisdictions, recounts, and audits. It is time to resist the siren song of conspiracy theorists and election deniers by standing up for electronic systems that have proven again and again to be more accurate, faster, and more secure than hand counts.
Election officials, for their part, must be proactive and transparent in educating voters on these advantages. The alternative as we have seen is disinformation and chaos, and the undermining of public confidence in a core principle of American democracy: the sanctity of the vote.
The California law underscores the frontline need for robust technology, coupled with paper ballots for auditing purposes. The survival of democracy — of the sanctity of the vote and the peaceful transfer of power — depends on voter confidence in the integrity of elections.
Mugica is the CEO of Smartmatic, a maker of voting machines.
