brennan center for justice

executive summaryFailed voting machines, frustrated voters and lost votes: these have been a constant in news reportsfollowing every recent major election cycle. That should not be surprising. The voting systems 1 used inthe United States today are complicated machines; each runs on tens of thousands of lines of softwarecode. As with automobiles and airplanes, automatic garage door openers and lawnmowers, occasionalmalfunctions are inevitable – even after rigorous product testing.When it comes to system failures, however, voting machines are different from automobiles and airplanes,and other products, in at least one important respect: for the vast majority of voting systems in usetoday, (1) manufacturers are not required to report malfunctions to any government agency, and (2)there is no agency that either investigates such alleged failures or alerts election officials and the generalpublic to possible problems (let alone requires voting system manufacturers to fix such problems).As this report demonstrates, the consequence of this lack of oversight is predictable. Voting systemsfail in a particular county in one election, and then again later, under similar circumstances, but ina different locale. These repeated failures disenfranchise voters and damage public confidence in theelectoral system.The Brennan Center reviewed hundreds of reports of problems with voting systems in the last eightyears, and closely studied fourteen of them. Our study shows that election officials and the publicare often completely reliant on the private companies that sell and service this voting equipment andrelated service contracts to voluntarily keep them aware of potential problems with those systems.As one election official we interviewed noted, “vendors are in the business of selling machines, andoften don’t have an incentive” to inform present and future customers of certain problems with theirsystems. 2The core thesis of this report is simple: we need a new and better regulatory structure to ensure thatvoting system defects are caught early, officials in affected jurisdictions are notified immediately, andaction is taken to make certain that they will be corrected for all such systems, wherever they are usedin the United States.Based on our review of regulatory schemes in other industries, we are convinced that the focal point forthis new regulatory system must be a clearinghouse – a national database, accessible by election officialsand others, that identifies voting system malfunctions that are reported by voting system vendors orelection officials. If this database is going to have any real benefit, voting system vendors must berequired to report all known malfunctions and election officials must have full access to the database.The Election Assistance Commission (EAC), the relatively new federal agency charged with the task ofcreating a testing program for new voting system has, within its limited federal mandate, made greatstrides in the last two years increasing quality control for some of the country’s newest voting systems.However, to fully address the problem of underreported and unaddressed voting system problems, theEAC or other federal agency should be given statutory authority and resources to fully implement thekind of database recommended in this report. Such a database would make our electoral system stronger.It would be easier for election officials and others to ensure that their equipment is as user-friendly andaccurate as possible. It would also make voting machine vendors more accountable to public officialsand taxpayers, incentivizing manufacturers to enhance internal controls. Given the billions of dollarsspent by federal and local governments to purchase and maintain new voting equipment over the lastseveral years, this is no small thing.Brennan Center for Justice | 1