To the Editor:

Your Feb. 6 article on the costs of the four voting systems the Bucks County commissioners are considering only touched the tip of the iceberg: initial costs. It did not include the operating costs under the surface. The three direct recording electronic systems (DREs) have far greater operating costs than the optical scanner system.

The initial costs varied from the cheapest, the optical scanner at $3.3 million, to the most expensive, the Danaher at $4.3 million. While Bucks County will be able to get $3 million from the federal government for the initial cost, the ongoing operating costs will be paid year after year by the taxpayers of Bucks County. 

Those operating costs include machine programming, software upgrades, storage, printing cost, annual licensing fees, warranties and batteries. Operating costs for the DREs will be more than for optical scanners because the county has to own and maintain so many more machines. A precinct with three lever machines now will need between three and seven machines depending on the system chosen, while only one optical scanner is needed. The larger DREs will also need more climate-controlled storage space due to high failure of fragile components and their greater numbers and size. Dauphin County had to build a warehouse to keep their Danaher machines plugged in. Replacement batteries for DREs cost $145 per machine compared with $50 for op/scans. 

Studies comparing the ongoing costs of DREs vs. optical scanners have been done in North Carolina and Florida. The November 2004 election in Miami-Dade County cost $7.1 million using touch-screen machines. If optical scanners had been used, it was estimated the cost would have been $5.1 million, 29 percent less.  North Carolina compared the cost per vote in counties using optical scanners with DREs: $5.15 for DREs compared with $3.98 for optical scanners. Those studies included the cost of paper ballots, which are an ongoing cost for optical scanners.

Arizona, Michigan, North Dakota, and Hawaii are 100 percent optical scan states. Minnesota, after careful study, has also joined them, citing accuracy, reliability and cost effectiveness. New Mexico's governor wants his state to go op/scan because their Danaher and Sequoia machines lost so many votes in 2004. Perhaps Bucks County might want to talk to them.

Patricia Jimenez

Doylestown Township