To the Editor:

I am replying to your editorial that compares touchscreen machines to ATMs. Would that were the case. ATMs are more secure and reliable than any touchscreen will ever be. Please note also that they leave banker-verifiable paper trails, besides the option of viewing your account history on screen. The paper receipt is automatic. Gambling machines are as secure as ATMs, both far more secure than touchscreens.
      I tried one of your Danahers and nearly fell over in the process of attempting to view the console the way a visually impaired person would. This experience is detailed in a letter I wrote to the editor of the Courier-Times last week. The machine in addition malfunctioned. Then I
couldn't even see the category specified in the write-in portion of the machine, the very upper right-hand corner.
      I know recounts are a pain in the neck. So is democracy. It is hard work. There are thousands of citizens who will volunteer happily to count paper ballots--either actual ones or the ones generated by optical scanners. Without a verifiable paper ballot, who knows where in cyberspace our uniquely precious vote will disappear? We need accuracy. We need accountability. We need reliability and transparency.
      WE NEED MACHINES THAT WILL COUNT OUR VOTES ACCURATELY without being subject to tampering and hacking and fixing. Touchscreens are a work in progress and they have lots of progress ahead of them before we can think of using them.

Marta Steele
Press Liaison
Coalition for Voting Integrity