Voltaire said that the perfect is the enemy of the good. 

Voltaire wasn’t trying to select a secure system of voting machines. The integrity of our election results is a clear case where “good” just isn’t “good enough.”
With regards to the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), we have seen the disastrous become the enemy of the franchise—the disastrous being a series of uncertifiable voting machines that the United States Department of Justice is prepared to force on the State of New York.

New York is the only state in the union that is not compliant with HAVA. The result: New York has been spared the nightmares of some other states that rushed into electronic voting, using their millions of federal dollars to buy computerized machines only to see their elections compromised and equipment decertified, replaced or retrofit at an enormous cost.

Some suggest that the state’s lethargic response-time to HAVA is indicative of some inherent shrewdness that we have as New Yorkers, that somehow escapes our brothers and sisters in other states throughout the union. In truth, Albany’s inability to act on HAVA in a timely manner simply caused New York State to miss the boat. But in doing so, we were fortunate to see the boat sink from the shore. The Department of Justice wants us to get on it anyway.

In late December, a federal judge, Gary Sharpe, stated that HAVA machine selection could be wrested away from the State Board of Elections during the September 2008 and November 2008 primary and general elections, respectively. Even if there existed a voting machine secure enough for New York’s standards, to force the replacement of the state’s lever voting machines with new, unfamiliar technology in a high-turnout presidential election year does not make sense. In the City of New York, even the slightest growing pain implementing a new system could result in a massive case of voter disenfranchisement.

But the point is moot because there doesn’t even exist a machine that is fit for implementation. HAVA provides funding and a framework for states to modernize elections, but it leaves the certification of machines and the guidelines thereof to states to determine. To do this, New York passed the Election Reform and Modernization Act in 2005 with the benefit of the experience of states that stumbled following their own implementation of HAVA. In turn, New York has the toughest standards to date. We should now allow vendors the opportunity to submit and have voting systems certified to that level.

The Department of Justice isn’t interested in New York’s standards, only that New York isn’t in compliance with a Federal law. Sharpe has made it clear that he has the authority to toss the commissioners of the State Board of Elections into jail for its continued failure to comply with HAVA.

Here’s a better idea: Rather than refuse to grant New York State the benefit of its earlier inaction, the Department of Justice should continue to work with the state to come up with a better interim plan to accommodate voters with disabilities. It tried in 2006, but the state’s interim plan then fell short and must be revisited. The State Board of Elections has agreed to place ballot-marking devices for voters with disabilities at every poll site for the September and November 2008 elections. Under the strong arm of the Department of Justice, it also agreed to set aside New York State’s voting system standards. With the court holding a heavy hammer on HAVA, what vendor would feel compelled now or ever to make a serious attempt to holistically meet state standards?

HAVA implementation has turned out to be a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Despite its noble intentions—modern elections and inclusive enfranchisement for voters with disabilities—it has become a feeding frenzy for vendors to score lucrative government contracts selling equipment that by and large does not do what it is supposed to do: provide secure, transparent and verifiable elections. The Justice Department’s assertion that New York should somehow settle for this equipment anyway is a wolf in wolf’s clothing. And nobody’s fooled.

Simcha Felder is a Democrat representing parts of Brooklyn in the City Council. He is chair of the committee on governmental operations.
Neal Rosenstein is the government reform coordinator for the New York Public Interest Research Group.