Verified Voting Logo
Edit Your PreferencesContact VerifiedVoting.orgAbout VerifiedVoting.org
Verified Voting HomeJoin - Help us do this work!Donate - Help us do this work!Take Action Today!Endorse the resolution!
Printer Friendly Version

See information for:

The Verified Voting Foundation engages in educational activities permitted by IRC Section 501(c)(3). Please visit VerifiedVoting.org for info about 501(c)(4) lobbying activities. You can also visit Vote Trust USA, a project of the Verified Voting Foundation. Also, check out our blog and twitter feed.

E-Mail This Page

Home   »  News  »  E-Voting News  »  N.C. House Approves New Voting ...


N.C. House Approves New Voting Machine Restrictions

Associated Press via News and Observer
August 11th, 2005

RALEIGH, N.C. -- The state House unanimously agreed late Thursday to permit only three types of voting methods in North Carolina and also agreed on how to disburse government grants to help pay for machine upgrades.

The measure, developed after Carteret County electronic voting machines lost 4,438 ballots in last November's election, also requires state election officials to hand out more than $36 million in grants to meet new standards.

With the 2006 elections, voting in North Carolina only will occur in the form of optical scan ballot machines, electronic recording machines or paper ballots counted by hand. Electronic machines would have to provide a paper copy of a voter's ballot, which could be corrected by the voter before they are recorded.

The bill will help voters know their ballots are being counted by accurate and reliable machines that have a backup if a machine fails, said Rep. Jean Preston, R-Carteret.

"If we don't have people feeling good about their vote and making sure their vote was recorded as they intended ... and counted, then we are in a sad state of affairs in North Carolina," Preston said.

Counties only will be able to purchase machine brands that have been certified by the State Board of Elections.

The bill now returns to the Senate, which approved a slightly different version two weeks ago and must decide whether to accept the House version.

The House amended the Senate edition by laying out a formula by which federal and state grant money will be given to all 100 counties to meet the standards. As many as 88 counties may have to buy or upgrade machines.

Bill supporters say the amounts should be enough for most counties to purchase the least expensive optical scan machines. If they want to buy more expensive electronic machines, they'll have to pay the difference.

"This is a bargain for every county, whether you intend to buy a new machine or not," said Rep. Joe Kiser, R-Lincoln.

The bill also would allow the State Board of Elections to experiment during the 2006 elections with alternatives to a paper record of a ballot. That may include audio playbacks of a voter's choice or a photographic image of an electronic ballot.

Elections officials also would perform sample hand recounts statewide and compare totals to ensure voting systems are accurate.

The Carteret County mistake occurred when a vendor failed to change a setting on a group of electronic machines used in early voting. The lost ballots threatened to require election officials to call a new statewide election in the close agriculture commissioner's race.

Announcements

August 26, 2010
On India’s Electronic Voting Controversy
August 25, 2010
Pac-Man for president: Hack highlights e-voting flaws
August 6, 2010
Voting Technology Research Gets In-Depth
July 27, 2010
State Election Officials: Recountable Process A Must for Overseas Voters
July 20, 2010
Online Voting: All That Glitters Is Not Gold (Unless You're a Vendor)
June 21, 2010
Voting Without A Net In South Carolina
June 17, 2010
Voting results in New Jersey should not be mysterious
June 16, 2010
Verified Voting Calls for Recountable, Auditable Voting Systems Following South Carolina Primary
June 16, 2010
Voting integrity groups call for investigation of South Carolina voting systems in wake of unexpected primary results in Democratic US Senate race
June 15, 2010
On the South Carolina Primary
May 23, 2010
Benefits, risks of e-mail ballots weighed
May 4, 2010
PA - Team 4: Security Concerns About Voting Machines Remain
April 26, 2010
California Assembly committee endorses UC Berkeley statistician's election auditing method
March 8, 2010
Feds Move to Break Voting-Machine Monopoly
March 2, 2010
Is the Internet the Right Place for Our Ballots? Election Administration and Voting Rights Thought Leaders Weigh in on the Future of Overseas Voting at Summit 2010
February 25, 2010
Minnesota Civic Groups Refute Recount Claims
February 17, 2010
Groups and Election Officials Warn Department of Justice that Voting Machine Vendor Merger will Inflate Costs to Taxpayers, Threaten Election Accuracy and National Security
February 11, 2010
Fla. justices uphold local election law
February 3, 2010
NJ Judge Issues Mixed Order on Use of E-voting Machines
February 1, 2010
Ruling Issued in Rutgers–Newark Law School’s Constitutional Litigation Clinic Challenge to NJ's Electronic Voting Machines

Get E-Mail Alerts




Important Links

  • VVBlog: Check out the latest news and commentary at our blog.
  • Election Day Problems?
    Call 1-866-OUR-VOTE
  • Find Your Polling Place: Vote411.org
  • Questions? Contact Us
  • Vote Trust USA - national resource for state-based organizations supporting verifiable elections, a Verified Voting Foundation project


  • "The core of our American democracy is the right to vote. Implicit in that right is the notion that that vote be private, that vote be secure, and that vote be counted as it was intended when it was cast by the voter. And I think what we're encountering is a pivotal moment in our democracy where all of that is being called into question." (more here)

    Kevin Shelley, former
    California Sec. of State





    Verified Voting Foundation, Inc., is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation.

    © Copyright 2008, Verified Voting Foundation, Inc. All rights reserved, although reprint permission granted for nonprofit purposes with attribution to Verified Voting Foundation, Inc.


    Privacy    Site Map