The first version of this story is that the National Printing Office made a mistake in producing the ultraviolet security marks that are supposed to be used for authenticating the ballots in the May elections. Next, Commission on Elections officials said the number of ballots was overwhelming and the printing done so rapidly that the UV mark became smudged in some of the documents. Since Precinct Count Optical Scan machines cannot read smudged UV security marks, manual scanners will be used instead to authenticate the ballots.
Yesterday, Comelec officials pinned the blame on the private consortium that bagged the poll automation contract, Smartmatic-TIM, or Total Information Management, for using the wrong ultraviolet ink. The Comelec is still contemplating its next move.
In this week of solemn contemplation, Comelec officials should review the measures they are undertaking to ensure the success of the country’s initial foray into full poll automation. Several political parties have expressed concern over the transparency of the process from the moment votes are cast to the tallying and then to the proclamation of official results. Valid questions have been raised about the system of resolving challenges to vote results announced by the Comelec.
For all the glitches that are possible in anything mechanized, automation promises a major plus, which is a speedy vote count and release of official results within a day or two. The speed, it is hoped, will drastically reduce opportunities for manipulating election results, which has marred all electoral exercises in this country. But those results must reflect the true mandate of the people. This will depend on the integrity and efficiency of the automation process. The glitch in printing the UV security mark on the ballots is hardly reassuring. Comelec officials said about 50 percent of the ballots still need to be printed. The security mark problem must be addressed before the printing is complete and the ballots distributed all over the country. - (Philstar News Service, www.philstar.com)
Ballots cast on machine require scrutiny.(Commentary): An article from: The Register-Guard (Eugene, OR)
From paper ballots to voting machines in Stark County (Special report - Bureau of Governmental Affairs, University of North Dakota)
Fairness the ballot box: several high-profile cases claim that citizens who use inferior voting machines are disenfranchised when others vote with state-of-the-art ... isn't counted?: An article from: Trial
A comparison of the effects of voting machines and paper ballots on voter participation on a ballot measure (Special report - Bureau of Governmental Affairs, University of North Dakota ; no. 41)
THE VOTING MACHINE: REPORT ON THE HISTORY, USE AND ADVANTAGES OF MECHANICAL MEANS FOR CASTING AND COUNTING BALLOTS
