What They Fear Most

I feel sorry for the Post reporter who wrote this story about new recommendations on ballot procedures from the National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST's report (pdf), written in passive tense bureaucratese, guarantees cognitive lock-up. Still, it's an important document and well worth noting because it will form much of the basis for federal Election Assistance Commission standards—due in 2009 or 2010—which despite being voluntary are in fact required by most states. Since NIST's report strongly suggests that only paper ballots or a voter certified paper 'receipt' can be accurately recounted (if necessary), I would expect that prior to the 2008 election many states will move to early adoption of NIST compatible guidelines. A medium-sized and actually very important victory for democracy!

‡ It appears from wire service press reports that the Election Assistance Commission may have rejected NIST guidelines at the last moment, but I'm not sure whether this is in fact the case, or whether any further review may be part of the process—until a more detailed account of what happened becomes available I would not jump to any conclusions.

∗ Sure enough, and I'll toot my own horn on this (one sometimes has a sense for bureaucratic momentum), while just about everybody wrongly reported that the NIST guidelines had been rejected, it turns out that in a (not-so) stunning reversal they have been approved, more-or-less, after all.