Times Union: "With all this uncertainty, we’re left with the question: What in the current system is so broken that it urgently needs to be replaced with a new technology whose security, accuracy and legality are still being argued?”
Editorial: A technological rush
More and more counties are buying new voting machines, even with legal, legislative and security concerns unresolved.
By Times Union Editorial Board,OpinionMay 30, 2025
Why has the New York state Board of Elections allowed the use of voting machines that some watchdog groups and people on both sides of the political aisle don’t trust?
It’s both puzzling and troubling. So, too, is the decision by various counties around the state to buy them even with legislation and litigation over them still pending.
As the Times Union’s Emily Munson reports, the ExpressVote XL machines have been used in a small number of elections around the state in recent months, following their approval by the state board in 2023. They were used in a special Town Board election in Suffolk County and in village and school board elections in Monroe County. The school board elections drew some 32,000 voters.
A host of other counties have purchased the machines but haven’t used them yet; others are considering buying them.
Unlike the paper ballots that are still widely used in New York, the ExpressVote XL machines require voters to designate their choices on a touchscreen. The machines produce a paper ballot with the voter’s choices spelled out for the person to verify. If they OK the ballot, the machine reads the choices from bar codes that are also printed on the paper ballot. The paper ballot is stored in the machine for later verification if necessary.
Supporters of ExpressVote XL, launched in 2019 by Nebraska-based Elections Systems and Software LLC, say the machines are secure, accessible to people with disabilities and fully compliant with state law. The machines are certified by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
But critics point to problems in Pennsylvania, where voters over the years have complained of touchscreens being either too sensitive or not sensitive enough. That has caused votes not to register or wrong candidates being selected, and some barcodes have recorded results different from the printed list of candidates on the paper ballots.
A lawsuit by a coalition of election security groups to decertify the machines in Pennsylvania was settled two years ago with, among other things, software upgrades and an agreement that the state would publish reports on malfunctions.
Albany County, which isn’t buying the machines, also had concerns that since only one voter can use a machine at a time — unlike with paper ballots, which a number of people can fill out simultaneously and then have scanned — either voters will face longer waits, or counties will have to buy many more machines.
Even as counties are investing millions in the machines, a lawsuit led by Common Cause New York is challenging whether the machines comply with state election law. Various bills in the Legislature would block the machines’ use in New York or require voters to have the option of using paper ballots. And an executive order by President Donald J. Trump earlier this year included a ban on ballots with barcodes.
With all this uncertainty, we’re left with the question: What in the current system is so broken that it urgently needs to be replaced with a new technology whose security, accuracy and legality are still being argued?
And the answer keeps coming back: Nothing.
At the very least, counties should wait until the legal and legislative challenges have run their course before investing millions in devices that may end up being unusable.