There may be more interest in meeting the state deadline to certify the results of the election by the close of business on Monday, November 20, 2006 than finding the reason for the errors. Unfortunately, once the election is certified it may be nearly impossible to isolate machines and continue the investigation. Much of the reasoning for the 13% undervote are centering on voter action either voluntary or involuntary that resulted in the deficit in the votes cast in that race. This is a bad sign because it will not lead to a critical look at the machines or the technology.

The process should take a sleuthing approach and avoid looking for quick explanations for the errors made by the election system. We should work for a thorough investigation of the voting system log files, software, and hardware. This is an opportunity to understand and learn from the pitfalls of electronic voting systems that both record and count voter selections.