Home » News & Events » News Archive » 2002 Press Releases
ACLU Urges Court to Set Standards for Touch-Screen Voting to Safeguard Voters' Rights in Disputed Palm Beach Election
Contact
Miami: Alessandra Soler Meetze, ACLU-FL Communications Director,
(305) 576-2337 ext. 16 (office) or 786-208-7103 (cell)
Howard Simon, Executive Director, ACLU of Florida, (305) 710-1146 (cell)
Palm Beach: Gregory J. Shibley, ACLU of Florida cooperating attorney,
561-775-6025 (office) or via e-mail at Shibleylaw@aol.com
For Immediate Release:
May 28, 2002
MIAMI - In a motion filed today, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Florida is seeking to file a friend-of-the court brief in a pending Palm Beach County lawsuit contesting the results of the Village of Wellington run-off election. If permitted to enter the case, the ACLU will urge the court to set standards for the use of touch screen voting machines in order to avoid a repeat of the 2000 election fiasco.
"Without some standards to ensure the accuracy of new high-tech voting methods, the upcoming general election promises to be a repeat of the debacle of the November 2000 Presidential Election,?" said Howard Simon, Executive Director of the ACLU of Florida.
At issue is the use of the electronic touch-screens used in the Village of Wellington run-off election that named Lizbeth Benacquisto the winner of the council seat by only four votes. There were 2,600 ballots cast, of which 89 were by absentee ballot. The touch-screen voting machines recorded 78 under votes. That is, 78 people who went to the polls to cast a ballot in an election with only one race did not have their votes recorded.
In sworn statements, voters said they encountered problems with the new electronic voting method, including malfunctions where their votes were not recorded even after they touched the screen. As a result, candidate Albert Paglia filed a lawsuit challenging the outcome of the March 26 election, arguing that malfunction skewed the results and tainted the election process.
"The legitimacy of an elected government depends on the reliability of the election process," said ACLU of Florida cooperating attorney Gregory J. Shibley, of North Palm Beach. "That process includes voting and, where applicable, recounts. The ACLU's interest is in the integrity of the election process, not in who wins the election. We seek to defend and protect the right to vote, and to ensure, insofar as possible, that every vote is counted."
If permitted to enter the case, the ACLU of Florida will file a friend-of-the-court brief urging the court to order an appropriate remedy in the contested election and to impose minimum standards for touch-screen voting methods.
The ACLU will recommend setting voting standards that ensure voters can verify choices prior to casting a ballot and that the touch-screen voting system be capable of producing an auditable record of each vote cast, a summary of the total votes cast, and a notification of under votes.
"When faulty voting systems interfere with a person's right to vote and skew election results courts have the obligation to issue an appropriate remedy, including when appropriate a new election," added Simon.
"Unless the court steps in to address the problem and set standards for election officials across the state, we're headed for a disaster in the November when these new voting technologies will be used in Florida's most populous counties."
BACKGROUND ON ACLU PARTICIPATION IN ELECTION CHALLENGES
The ACLU has routinely represented voters and candidates in election contests in order to protect the right to vote and the right to participate in an election process that is fair. And it has done so without regard for partisan interests and concerns that might have been involved in the elections.
The ACLU challenges, which have involved offices ranging from city council member to sheriff to president of the United States, have been in furtherance of the constitutional principles expressed by the Supreme Court in the first "one person, one vote" decision, Reynolds v. Sims , 377 U.S. 533, 555 (1964):
"The right to vote freely for the candidate of one's choice is of the essence of a democratic society, and any restrictions on that right strike at the heart of representative government. The legitimacy of elected office, and indeed the legitimacy of government itself, rests upon the fairness and reliability of the electoral process."
