Human factor of elections

Utah's first wide-scale use of electronic voting machines should be considered a success. One exception might be a database glitch in Utah County that caused temporary problems at 112 of 118 polling locations, resulting in delays in voting.

But a detailed review of those events shows that neither the voting machines, voter card encoders nor the cards themselves caused the problem. A back-up database used to program encoders was not identical to the original database. That meant voter cards were encoded with the wrong precinct information. Tests did not pick up the discrepancies because the backup database was used for the trials. The original database was locked down when early voting began and couldn't be used to program the encoders.

In defense of election workers, Utah County had to prepare 45 different ballots for 118 polling locations because of different voting districts as well as federal, state and local races. That alone was a logistical headache. Utah County has but a handful of full-time election workers.

But it also points out the potential for problems in conducting elections that have nothing to do with new-fangled equipment. It was, after all, the machine that detected these problems.

Humans are perhaps the greatest variable in conducting any election. Unfortunately for Utah County, which had been a holdout in adopting electronic voting technology, early delays at the polling places fed the hysteria around the voting-machine technology. Questioning the accuracy of these machines has become a cottage industry for some.

It's time to dispatch with the hand-wringing and conspiracy theories. Overall, Utah's first large-scale use of electronic voting machines worked exceedingly well. In fact, Lt. Gov. Gary Herbert's office, which oversees elections statewide, has reported that the statewide audit of the new electronic machines came back "perfect."

Give credit to hard-working county clerks, election workers and poll workers who entered a brave new world on Nov. 7.