New voting technology praised
Results slower than predicted but much faster than previous elections
Announcing the final results took much longer than expected, but election officials are proclaiming the new technology used in yesterday's municipal elections a success.
Officials had predicted it would take just 90 minutes to have all of the votes from yesterday's municipal elections counted. However, final results were still unavailable three hours after the polls closed at 8 p.m.
That's because of the high number of special ballots that couldn't be fed through the electronic machines until after the polls closed, said Michael Quinn, the province's chief electoral officer.
"That was our cautiously optimistic assessment. There has been very heavy special balloting around the province and a lot of the results can't be closed off until all of those special ballots are put through the machines," he said.
"That's taking a little longer than we expected."
Long lines formed outside several polling stations, including one in Dieppe, as voters seemed eager to vote for change, electing new mayors in a number of the province's urban centres. However, Quinn said the line-ups weren't related to delays caused by the new technology, but by everyone heading out to vote at the same time.
"Any election situation sees peak periods and this one is no different," he said, adding the majority of voters head to the polls between 5 p.m. and 8 p.m.
In addition, some machines in rural areas had to be driven to another location before the votes could be counted. The new machines scan votes as soon as ballots are placed into the boxes and allow for the results to read much faster. The machine counted the votes for each candidate and stored the information on a computer memory card.
The machines produced paper tallies of the votes, which were taken to local returning offices. The results were then fed into a computer at the returning offices and transmitted to a database at Election NB headquarters in Fredericton, allowing them to be posted on the website almost immediately.
Quinn said there were no problems with the machines.
"The voting throughout the day was very good and steady," said Michael Quinn, the province's chief electoral officer. "In some cases there were line-ups at the peak periods, but throughout the day the new system took people through very quickly. We had a lot of positive comments."
About 167,000 eligible voters -- about 42 per cent -- voted in yesterday's elections. That compares to 46 per cent during the 2004 municipal elections.
Officials will consider using some aspects of the new technology in provincial elections, including the electronic voters' lists and the updated voter information cards with encoded information.
However, the electronic tabulating machines might not be used in provincial elections, as they are generally less complicated than municipal ones because there are fewer candidates.
"When you're putting forward a new system like this, you can use your best estimate and go accordingly, but you have to do a postmortem and see what you can do better next time," said Quinn. "It's far and away faster than the old system."
Despite the delays, there were few complaints from voters in Metro Moncton.
"It seemed to jam at first, but it worked out," said Sterling Keirstead, as he exited a Riverview polling station. "From what I heard people saying, it seems to be going a lot quicker."
Keirstead said his experience was "indubitably positive," and that he would definitely prefer the electronic system over the former paper ballot system of yesteryear.
However, not everyone was as quick to jump on board.
For Ruth Cowan, the electronic system left something to be desired.
"I would probably trust people counting it (the votes) than machines anyway," she said.
"You saw what happened in the States with their electronics. I'd always trust people counting it by hand more."
Cowan said aside from that, she found no difference in the new system, as opposed to the paper ballot system, adding if the province were to switch back she wouldn't mind.
Others expressed similar sentiments.
Sharon Major said that although the voting seemed to go faster, there wasn't much of a difference.
"I don't see one to be any different from the other," she said.
Major, however, was not concerned the computers would err in anyway, saying she trusted them to produce a proper count.
For the most part, voters were able to come and go as they pleased. The only drawback seemed to be the lineup to get inside.
"I was surprised to see there was a lineup to get in," said Kim Steeves. "I've never seen that before when I've come to vote. But once you get inside everything seems to go pretty slick."
The new technology also attracted observers from across the country. Elections officials from across Canada and the United States were in the province yesterday to observe the new technology.
"Everybody is here to observe how the process unfolds and how much the voters like this," said John Hollins, the chief electoral officer for Ontario, adding chief electoral officers from Nova Scotia, Nunavut and the North West Territories were in Fredericton, too.
Steven Levy, an elections official from Westchester County, just north of New York City, said he travelled north to look at options to help modernize the state's voting infrastructure.
He said new legislation has New Yorkers making the transition from lever machines -- a mechanical system in which voters enter a booth to pull a series of levers to mark ballots -- to electronic scanning systems such as those being used in New Brunswick.
"It's going to be a major generational change in voting," he said.
The 229 machines, leased from Dominion Voting, cost the province about $800,000.
Hollins said part of the decision-making process when considering a switch to new voting technology involves weighing the financial cost to taxpayers.
He said a solid business case would have to be made before legislators in Ontario voted to support a change.
"It makes sense to look at this," he said. "Play with it; try it in a by-election and see how our voters liked it and didn't like."
n With files from Marc Hudon and Nathan Rochford.
More The News
Search Articles
More CE Network Sites & Partners:
Comments (4)
All comments are subject to the site Terms of Use. For a full commenting tutorial click here.
Our editorial team relies on filtering technology and our visitor community to identify inappropriate comments. In the event that a site user has submitted offensive content that has evaded our filter, please select the option to Flag As Inappropriate presented within the comment. Thank you for helping to keep this site clean.
In our case, the workers were older (than I even) and their computer skills were halting; the operators seated beside them had 4 voters show up without the proper documentation, all 4 of these voters blazed through ahead of us while our operator was just finishing up with my wife and I!!
The ballot was simple & easy to use; "fill in the circle" your done! But more amazingly the voting collection system was super fast. I have every confidence in the 'computer counting' system; who wouldn't after all these years with computers we should feel confident the 'scan' will do the job counting ballots.
Theoretically, the tabulations will be quicker and more accurate. Why officials put 90 minutes as a marker was optimistic for the first attempt is beyond me.
I was pleased with the new system; there will be problems but the voting area moved quickly(6pm)and expediently!!
Keep a close eye on these types of machines. It starts off being the secondary method of tabulation. First method being physically counting the ballots. Remember, a recount cost tens of thousand of dollars and months to get the results. Diebolts voting machines in the States, fixed the elections through the memory cards. Once we get comfy with these voting machines, they become the primary method of voting. Hense, no paper ballots. This opens up room for fraudulent results.