1 Voting Systems Accessibility. Presenter: David Baquis. >> JACQUIE: Good afternoon everyone. Welcome to today's webcast: Voting Systems Accessibility. We will be discussing HAVA, the Election Assistance Commission, Voting Systems Testing Labs, Voluntary Voting Systems Guidelines, Accessible Vote Verification and the DOJ checklist for polling places among many other things. A very timely webcast with the election less than three weeks away and early voting already starting in some parts of the country. David Baquis is our presenter today. He is an I. T. accessibility specialist with the U.S. Access Board. He delivers presentations on accessible electronics and technology, writes technical assistance materials and responds to public inquiries on Section 508 of the Rehab Act and 255 of the Telecommunications Act. He also provides technical support to the Access Board members who serve on advisory committees to the Election Assistance Commission. His backgrounds blends experience in health care, consumer education, disability issues, technology and public policy. This webcast is sponsored by the National Institute on Disability Rehabilitation and Research, NIDRR, who funds your host for today's program, the DBTAC Southwest ADA Center. I'm your moderator, Jacquie Brennan and I'm with 2 the ILRU project, DBTAC Southwest ADA Center. I'll be assisting with today's presentation. For those of you who are listening to the webcast today to submit your questions, click on the E-mail button on your screen or you can E-mail them directly to swdbtac@ilru.org. If you have any technical difficulties today please feel free to call us at (713)520-0232. And if your PowerPoint slides are not changing during the presentation when you hear that they should be changing, then you may have to close the window and relog in for the PowerPoint to work correctly if you have logged in way before the webcast actually started. Again, I thank you for joining us today and now I'm pleased to introduce our presenter David Baquis and I will turn it over to you at this time. >> DAVID: Thank you very much. Yes, this is David Baquis on slide No. 2. I work for the U.S. Access Board. Moving on to slide No. 3. As mentioned already, I'm going to begin with some basic background on voting systems and then move into some specific design requirements and issues that people have been discussing with regard to voting systems and some additional resources. The next slide is simply a picture of the building that houses the Access Board. On slide No. 5, the Access Board is an independent federal agency, which means that we don't fall under a larger department. The Access Board refers to the staff who work to support the Access Board as well as the actual official board of 25 people, half of whom were appointed by the presidents. We're best known for having issued the Guidelines for the Americans with Disabilities Act. We also promulgate standards under authorities of other 3 laws, including 508 which are requirements for accessibility and information technology. We have a large component of our staff that provides technical assistance and training which is of course what I'm doing for you today, and we have a role with regard to voting systems in the sense that we provide advice to the Election Assistance Commission through a couple of their advisory committees. Slide 6 is just a title for a brief history. Slide No. 7 I'll describe some pictures that are in it. We have an illustration of somebody actually voting in person centuries ago. We have a picture of a ballot in which you could actually write in the name of the person you were voting for. Another picture of a ballot in which you could check off by hand who you wanted to vote for and there is also an illustration -- an early illustration of a voting booth from about 80 years ago. So that was passed. Now moving on to slide No. 8 as technology evolved, mechanical voting was available, but in this illustration, we see the issue of the chad that came up in the 2000 election with an arrow actually pointing to some places within the mechanical machine that would result in that chad. And next slide, No. 9, we then move on to electronic voting. And we have illustrations here of about four different kinds of electronic voting machines. In slide No. 10, a subset of electronic voting, we see a picture of a woman wearing a headset who is voting at an accessible voting station which features a touch screen, but allows her to hear information about where she's navigating and she can respond with a hand-held device to actually navigate and 4 make the selection. In slide 11 I'm simply stating as a disclaimer that the Access Board may select some illustrations of products as examples of product types, but we don't actually endorse specific companies. Slide 12 are some fast facts in recent history. Most of the information on this slide I took straight off the Election Assistance Commission's website. It talks about how the FEC, the Federal Election Commission updated the 1990 standards in 2002. So this was the first time we had accessibility requirements. The FEC approached the Access Board for some input when they were developing the standards. At that point in time, the machines themselves were being evaluated against the 2002 standards by an independent body, NASED, which stands for National Association of State Election Directors. The point is it was this entity outside the federal government that was certifying machines. That as time evolved, the Election Assistance Commission promulgated their own guidelines as they now call them for voting systems and the EAC established their own program to certify voting systems. So let's move on to slide 13 and which I'm going to talk a little bit more about HAVA and the EAC. HAVA meaning the Help America Vote Act, and EAC being the acronym for the Election Assistance Commission. Slide 14, we're specifically focusing now on the Help America Vote Act. This is what actually created the Election Assistance Commission and required the EAC to develop the guidelines for voting systems, which include accessibility provisions but a lot more provisions for security. It also authorized the creation and really directed the creation of several advisory committees, one of which is called the TGDC, that's Technical Guidelines 5 Development Committee. And this is the advisory committee that actually drafted the recommendations for the design of the new generation of voting systems. And NIST, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, their director chaired that advisory committee and most of the meetings were held there at the NIST location. The EAC issued those guidelines to the VVSG as we call them, Voluntary Voting System Guidelines in 2005, but it's currently again refreshing them. And then I'll talk more about that process in a moment. But it's interesting that the VVSG has a lot of provisions on accessibility so that gives us something to talk about today. They were very generous with the time they devoted to learning about accessibility issues and it's actually the latest rule -- we just look across the federal government, it's the latest rule-making specifically on technology accessibility guidelines. So let's talk about slide 15 now where I focus on the EAC itself. The EAC has a number of programs, one of which is the certification program. Specifically it certifies voting systems as compliant with HAVA or conforming with the voluntary voting guidelines. It accredits the laboratories that does the testing and provides enforcement which it does actively. But it has many other programs, including research, which is interesting. They don't do the research themselves, necessarily for the most part, but they contract with many other entities that do the research and then they publish that in your clearinghouse, including a study of alternative voting methods, a focus group with voters with disabilities, and election day survey results. So let's move on to the next slide, I guess I'm on slide 16 now. Where I thought it would be interesting to call out some grants that the EAC 6 actually provided this year in 2008. And they've been doing this for more than one year, but there is grant money specifically to encourage college students to serve as poll workers. And I wrote as a question on this slide, has anyone thought of customizing a proposal focused specifically on recruiting and training students with disabilities? So that's something that the DBTAC and other entities may want to discuss. I guess whenever you hear money you kind of perk up and they actually have a minimum amount that they will contribute to the universities that respond to that. And there is also money from collection programs aimed at secondary school students, and they give examples for a variety of different types of things they'd be willing to fund, including team competitions and mock press conferences. Moving on to slide 17, the EAC provides technical assistance and it does it primarily through a clearinghouse. So it's eager to receive publications from the states and other entities that it might be able to post within its clearinghouse. And it's developed and published many materials of its own, for example, quick start management guides on issues such as acceptance testing and managing change. It published a number of reports including one that I found especially interesting which was an accessibility review of the California voting systems. So this is thick. If you look at it, there is a lot of pictures of voting systems in there and zooming in to specific accessibility features. So this is the first top to bottom review I've seen of voting systems from an accessibility perspective. You can also subscribe to an EAC E-mail list to get updates. So let's talk about slide 18. What is the Access Board's role with respect to voting system issues? I mentioned that we have two Access Board 7 members who both sit on the board of advisers on the Technical Guidelines Development Committee. And we've gone through a few generations of board members in that role. In addition to providing input specifically on development of the voting system guidelines, we've also provided feedback on many other documents, including one on poll worker training and some other management issues. On our own initiative last year, the Access Board planned and coordinated a workshop to train voting system testing laboratories on accessibility. We were very interested that there were laboratories who hadn't contacted us who were going to be evaluating voting systems for accessibility. We weren't clear on how well they actually understood the accessibility requirements and some of the related issues. So in collaboration with EAC and NIST, we kind of built a bridge with them and they know they can contact us if they have questions in the future. And slide 19, I talk about the current EAC rule-making and I mentioned how we're in the midst of change right now in the sense that EAC is currently updating what we call the next iteration of the voluntary voting systems guidelines and they've already received public comment on the draft, on the recommendations that the advisory committee delivered, and now they are in the process of an internal review and editing it. And at some point in the future we're going to see an NTRM, a Notice of Proposed Rule-making to again receive public comments. And when that happens, I encourage those on this call to consider reading the material and delivering comments and letting your constituencies know. Generally, they tend to receive very few comments, you know, from a technical, analytical perspective on the guidelines. Although in 8 terms of campaign, they did receive many comments in the last -- the last rule-making. And that's information you can talk about with the American Association of People with Disabilities. Right now I'm at slide 20, entitled Certification. So let me just do a check in to see if there is any questions. >> JACQUIE: Yes, we have a few. The first one was about I guess relating to the slide where the person who had a vision disability was wearing headphones. Do they bring their own headphones in to the accessible voting machine, or are the headphones provided? Or how does that work? >> DAVID: I would expect the polling place to provide headphones. If we step outside of the voting arena, and we look at other places in society that have a place to plug in headphones, for example, a bank ATM machine, in those scenarios, the expectation would be consumers would supply their own headsets. So people who are blind and experienced in coping with their disability know this and often carry a set of headphones with them now because they can use it in many places including places where other transactions would take place. But moving back into the voting arena, the idea is to have everything at that place that you'd need so that consumers wouldn't have to bring it in. So they could bring in their own and use it if they wish, but I would expect it to be supplied there if somebody didn't already have it with them. >> JACQUIE: This question is from Nashville, Tennessee. Are there any federal requirements that bear upon the provision of accessible sample voting ballots for voters who are blind or visually impaired? In my county, the pdf posted online by the county election commission is not accessible to screen readers. 9 >> DAVID: Excellent question. That actually raises a few different issues. >> JACQUIE: Great. >> DAVID: One is what the requirements would be for the website accessibility for the county, even if it wasn't related to voting, anything else on their website. >> JACQUIE: That's right. >> DAVID: So for that, that varies by state and by jurisdiction. If it was, let's say, the state of California website, then everything on their website would have to be accessible, but how that trickles down to the local level, I'm not certain. You'd probably want to talk to the ADA person. >> JACQUIE: Definitely they are required to because the ADA, you know, affects state and local governments and so they would be required to have an accessible website. So, yeah, even absent the voting issue, that would be a problem; but what about sample ballots I guess in general. Do they have to be -- >> DAVID: In my silence I'm not confirming what you just said about the ADA covering websites. In terms of the sample ballot, it would seem -- certainly people are entitled to a reasonable accommodation, so if they post something that's not accessible and you're entitled to see a sample just like anybody else, then that would be something you could contact the state or county for so they could provide it to you in some alternative fashion. But I'll tell you the first thing I thought of when I was hearing the question, which wasn't about the ballot itself, I'm reminded of my experience walking into a polling place where they had a regular voting machine that everybody could try out to 10 see what it was like to vote before they went to one that actually worked that was tied into the system that counted, except that they didn't have a way for somebody to practice on the accessible machine which actually caused a problem. As it turned out, I found out the accessible machine wasn't working properly when it came to zooming and they didn't understand it and they couldn't help me. So that's another issue, too, but it's still an issue of fairness, of getting information in advance. And this actually ties in to something I say at the end of the PowerPoint show which is the importance of kind of test driving some of these voting systems if you have the time and inclination to do so. At the very least, you could probably go to -- I forget what the right name would be -- maybe like the county clerk's office -- no, the elections office in that jurisdiction to try it out there before you go to your polling place on a separate day. >> JACQUIE: Right. Okay, another question -- >> DAVID: We could say a lot more about that pdf. They should know generally that it is possible for a pdf to be designed in an accessible way and for further information on that, they are welcome to contact the Access Board. >> JACQUIE: Sure. And you can do that, but you know we find that probably every day where pdf's are not done in such a way that they are accessible to screen readers. So that can be a problem. Here is another question: When the time comes, please address whether absentee voting should be accessible under HAVA or under the ADA? I ask this question in light of the recent 11th Circuit court decision in AAPD versus Duval County, Florida. And this is from -- this is somebody in Florida writing. >> DAVID: I'd have to think about that for a second. I'm actually not 11 sure. I'm assuming that the means -- the accessible means provided is the voting system at the polling place. I don't believe that HAVA goes beyond that to require accessibility of the means as provided to you from home. There is certainly interest in that subject though. I think that was the study in alternative voting methods that they might want to read to start with. That's on the EAC website. >> JACQUIE: I know we've had some problems with the voting by mail ballots being -- the printing on them being so small that people with -- and since a lot of them go to people -- senior citizens, that was a big problem because they couldn't read them. The printing was so tiny to make it smaller in terms of mailing out, and then it really wasn't -- almost not usable to a lot of the population for which it was intended in the first place. So it was kind of odd. >> DAVID: I certainly encourage a collaboration in advance with the election office because where I live, for example, they actually provide an option of a large print ballot if I wanted to receive it that way at home. >> JACQUIE: This is someone who is writing in from Galveston County, Texas and due to the recent hurricane, the polling places have changed and it's possible that the assistance that this individual was going to try to offer at one polling place may not be able to occur and because of the switching locations. If accessible voting booths are not made available at the new voting locations, what are the options that they have? >> DAVID: Well, each jurisdiction I guess sets up its own contingency plan. We know that the law requires one accessible voting station per polling 12 place. So I would hope that they would find a way to comply with the law. If because of the crisis they are unable to, I don't know what contingencies they've set up, but certainly they should contact them in advance to see if they would be redirected to the closest location that does have an accessible voting booth or whether because of the situation they'd be providing an accommodation as a work around in the polling place that the person is used to going to. So I can't answer because that's a local question really. >> JACQUIE: Yeah. Are all polling places required to be accessible for people with various disabilities? Or is it permissible to have people with disabilities go to one polling place? >> DAVID: The law requires that all polling places have at least one voting system that's accessible, meaning in conformance with the voluntary voting system guidelines in 2005. So that's fond fundamental concept that that could be expected in all polling places as opposed to going to a quote-unquote special polling place for people with disabilities. It is certainly this segregation we want to get away from. You can think of that as a universally designed polling place. I even mention that in one of my slides. >> JACQUIE: Sure. During the process of developing the first VVSG, the Access Board took the position that if the ballot is paper, the paper does not have to be accessible. Does the Access Board still have this position for paper ballots, specifically regarding the next iteration of those VVSG? >> DAVID: The Access Board's position is one of fairness, that if somebody without a disability has the ability to verify their vote, then somebody with a disability should be able to as well. But the history behind that first iteration of the guidelines is that the committee was looking at low 13 hanging fruit, so to speak, just trying to polish the 2002 voting systems standards from the Federal Elections Commission. So, no, we don't have a position for a certain kind of technology. We just feel like whatever is provided should be provided equitably so that people with and without disabilities can use it. In addition, we understand the issue of security and the things that make that complicated, but, no, we don't have a position that we're only for paper. We see that in fact that accessibility is provided through the electronic system. That's what provides the adjustability for people with disabilities. >> JACQUIE: Okay. I have a couple more that I haven't gotten to read myself yet. Is there any mechanism in place to let people know about accessible voting places or to let people know about candidates' issues in an accessible format? I guess that's really up to the candidates to let you know about their position on issues in accessible form A. >> DAVID: That's right, and it would be in the interest of the candidates to call that out and say that our website is accessible, for example. What was the first part of that question? >> JACQUIE: Yeah, the first part was whether -- you know, how people know about HAVA and about the accessible voting? Is there any mechanism to let people know about that, that that exists? And I guess it's things like this, trying to get did word out about that. >> DAVID: Well, it's a multifaceted approach. In the mainstream, the poll workers could be encouraging people to check out the accessible voting station. The training is important so that poll workers are reminded that it's 14 available and understand how to use it. Certainly the consumer groups and advocacy groups can be educating their own membership about this. The EAC, of course, has some information available. And it also has the option of creating additional technical assistance on the subject which is something we recommended for them to do in the future so they can fit that in. So one thing that's quite interesting is that HAVA provided for states to receive money. And one of those pots of money was a smaller pot, but it was specifically to be used to help entities with issues like polling place accessibility, but it could also be used for development of outreach materials and training. So states and local entities have the option of folding this information into their existing brochures and other literature, including their own websites. >> JACQUIE: Okay, this one is -- this person just wrote what is paper accessibility? >> DAVID: I guess it's a contradiction in terms. Well, some paper could provide accessibility to some people, but not others. For example, let's say somebody is really anxious in social situation. Well, the absentee ballot is just right for them. They can vote alone. >> JACQUIE: Does federal law require -- >> DAVID: I can give you a better answer than that. That was just right off the top of my head. You know, if the print on the ballot to be more accessible, also the way it's designed to improve accessibility, to separate things and using some common sense. So there is a lot of things that can be done on paper. We're starting with the assumption that somebody has some sight to fill it out. So it's not all or nothing. 15 And the EAC has information on how to do that kind of thing on accessible ballot design or usable ballot design on their website. >> JACQUIE: Does federal law require that all polling places provide accessible parking? >> DAVID: That's an ADA question. This is one that's -- I know that parking is addressed. I'm not sure exactly how it's addressed. So I can't answer that definitively; but -- >> JACQUIE: If it's a place of public accommodation, then they have to have accessible parking as well. >> DAVID: I would think so. >> JACQUIE: I can answer that one. That's my area, but yeah. >> DAVID: There is discussion about curb side voting, too, but I guess that's a slightly different subject. >> JACQUIE: Okay, that's all the questions that I have in front of me right now. So go ahead. >> DAVID: People can contact your center if they have questions about the ADA. >> JACQUIE: You bet. >> DAVID: And the Department of Justice also has an ADA technical assistance line as well as their own publication, checklist for polling places that could be informative if somebody actually want to put their finger on it. >> JACQUIE: Right. >> DAVID: So we're on slide 21, and we're talking about certification now. And I thought it was exciting that not only do we have this federal agency that certifies voting systems, but it even certifies the entity that's going to 16 tells the voting systems, be it the laboratories, which they call VSTL's, voting systems testing laboratories. What the lab actually does is develop a report which it provides to the EAC and then based on that report and some additional questions that the EAC may have, the EAC makes the final determination whether a laboratory is accredited and the names of current accredited laboratories are on the EAC website. Moving on to slight 22, voting systems certification, there is a few things to talk about here, but this is a robust program within the EAC. They have their own director of this program. There is a certification program manual. The manufacturers are the ones that actually pay for their product to be certified and that can be quite expensive. But I thought it was pretty exciting that people often ask when it comes to the world of Section 508 if the federal government does testing on things like computers, websites, videos, telephones and so on to ensure that these things the federal government is buying are accessible, and the answer is no. The federal government has no program to certify information technology is accessible with this exception of the EAC and certifying a voting systems which is form of information technology as HAVA compliant which means it has to be accessible. Of course the federal government doesn't buy them, but at least we're involved in the process. It's an interesting precedent that we may come back and look to. On slide 23, usability is something that's looked at as well. So that would be looked at across the board, not just in the accessible voting station, but the usability requirements would apply across the board to all voting systems. So, for example, as we were developing the voluntary voting system guidelines, we thought really tall machines in the room should provide a way for 17 somebody who has partial vision to be able to see better, not just the one that might be in the corner. And by the way, the law doesn't require that there only be one. It could be that all the machines in the room are accessible and it might be that way. They might all have ahead phone Jack in them so that somebody with a disability could just walk up to anyone with a headset provided to them and some other equipment that would go along with it. Let's talk about enforcement just briefly. It's powerful when you not only have a set of guidelines for how to design and make the machines, but you also enforce them. And there is enforcement both of the voting system testing laboratories as well as the machine itself and the manufacturers know that if they don't work things out with the EAC, ultimately a dessert if I indication could occur, but ideally it wouldn't get to that point. The EAC would provide feedback and the voting systems manufacturers can make adjustments. The next slide, 25, on conformance versus (inaudible) I just thought it was interesting to note the difference between what's required of a state or what's required of a voting system. The voting systems conform to the actual guidelines for how to design voting systems, whereas the states would comply with their own state laws. Sometimes people get those confused. That helps kind of sort out the confusion of my voting system isn't HAVA compliant, what does that mean to the state? Well, I assume most of the states will require a certified voting system so that in turn could be a problem for them. In the 508 community, it's interesting that the federal agency could buy something that's not fully accessible, but have an out because (inaudible). The next slide I'm just being silly that there are some things that 18 one might do to enhance a voting system. This is a picture of a pig with lipstick on it. The lipstick will not make your voting system have an accessible. So it's important for entities that are purchasing these systems to make the distinction between what was actually required for conformance versus how they might have gone the extra mile to improve them. In slide 28, I'm talking about accessibility versus accommodation. And this is important because HAVA requires voting systems have built into them all that's needed for accessibility. So that voters may need some additional accommodations beyond that, but that's different than what's required technologically from the voting system itself. There is three types of access generally speaking in technology design guidelines: Communication access, information access, and physical access. And so we can be thinking about these three different types of accessibility as we go through some of the provisions. Communication access really wouldn't apply because that applies to two way voice conversations, but some of those requirements carried over into let's say if a voting system had a hand set and it might need some of those features that somebody would need in a telephone hand set, issues such as hearing aid compatibility. So let's do a quick review of some of the voting systems on slide 31, I have a picture of some paper ballots and I mention that -- I think I made a typo. I meant to say like the 1800s, not the 1900s when they were first introduced. They are still used by about 2 percent of registered voters in the U.S. in some rural areas and of course for absentee voting. And there is mechanical lever machines which I mentioned earlier. A voter might pull down a 19 selected lever to indicate choices. There is a picture of a mechanical machine in slide 32. Slide 33, we have a picture of punch cards, and again that led to some of the problems in the 2000 election. They were first used in 1964. And this is information I got off the federal election commission website. It said in 1996, 37 percent of registered voters were still using them. Of course that was before HAVA. So we will probably see different numbers. Then in slide 34, we have the optical scan machine. We have an illustration here of the little character saying to fill in the oval completely. The implication being that you fill in the oval next to the candidate that you want to select using a paper and pencil, but with optical scan machines these days, can you make your selection electronically that had that marked on paper that's then fed into the machine for scanning. So there is more than one version of this kind of technology. The next slide, slide 35, DRE machines allow voters to enter their selection through a touch screen, but to make it accessible there has to be another means of using it beyond the touch screen. Which leads to the next slide, No. 36, where we see a woman seated with headphones using an accessible voting system. And all polling places should have an accessible voting system by January of 2006. So it's been a couple of years now. That's the effective date of that requirement. And the last bullet in the slide by the way is a reminder that anybody can use that touch screen machine, that accessible voting system, not just the person with the disability. So people might just want to try the new technology or maybe the line is shorter there for whatever reason. 20 I now am prepared to talk about some of the specific requirements in the VVSG. Are there any questions though? >> JACQUIE: Yes, we have a few. It says most voters don't know that certain accommodations are available. Is it permissible to put a notice on the sample ballot that goes to each voter's home that an audiotape of the sample ballot and audio equipment for voting is available? >> DAVID: I'm trying to think about this question. This would be sent to people's homes why? >> JACQUIE: They may send out a sample ballot to all voters, to just say, you know, here is a sample ballot. This is what you'll be looking at. That's what it sounds like to me. I read the question as it was written. So I'm just guessing, and would it be all right to put a notice on there that says, you know, you can get an audiotape of this ballot or audio equipment for voting is available. >> DAVID: Well, I think what a governmental entity would want to do is say something more general, which is that they provide reasonable accommodations so they don't discriminate on the basis of disability, but not necessarily to say it that specifically. They could, but there might be different ways that voters would want to get the information. Some might want to just receive it electronically like on a website or with E-mail attachment, however they want to provide that information. And they can understand it through their assistive technology. So not everybody would want to hear an audiotape of see large print or get it in Braille. Basically, governments know that there are a variety of reasonable accommodations available and I guess they would work it out with voters on a case-by-case basis. And that would apply not just to that sample 21 ballot. I didn't realize they were doing that. But if it applied to other information that's provided as well. >> JACQUIE: Okay, the next couple are comments to prior questions. One says regarding the lack of an accessible voting machine in Galveston, if the voter with a disability needs assistance, the voter has a right to choose who provides that assistance according to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, section 205. And then on another question, it says print accessibility may also mean that any information printed on paper should also be accessible in some other format for those unable to access that information on paper. And now there is a question from Oregon: To your knowledge, have any of the current accessible voting systems been certified under the 2005VVSG's? >> DAVID: Not to my knowledge. It's something to think we are on top of here at the Access Board, but the last I heard that discussed, it hadn't been done. I guess that's something that you'd want to take up directly with the Election Assistance Commission. >> JACQUIE: Okay, this is another Florida question: If a polling place that is accessible in all other ways is open outside the ADA paratransit service corridor, and the disabled community cannot get to it, is the polling place still considered accessible? That may not really be a you question. >> DAVID: That's not my area of expertise. >> JACQUIE: Right, because that involves paratransit. I can address that one. To say the polling place would still be accessible. Accessibility is snot viewed in terms of whether or not its knee a paratransit service corridor. So the polling place would still be considered accessible even if it's outside 22 the service corridor which is required to extend three-fourths of a mile on either side of the regular fixed routes system corridor. So that doesn't really have anything to do with whether or not the polling place is considered accessible though. >> DAVID: It's an interesting question though because it really raises the question what does accessibility mean? Which is much -- I didn't realize how confused various sectors of society were on this. But accessible can mean conformance with certain guidelines and standards, but for some people, accessible means available. So it's not accessible in the sense of not necessarily being available, but yes, it's accessible in the sense that it might be meet ADA requirements for that site or the HAVA requirements for the voting system. There is accessibility and then accessibility. >> JACQUIE: Well, that's true. That's for sure true, but -- in other words, the polling place would have no way to sort of govern whether or not somebody could get there. You know, they don't control their paratransit service corridor. So, you know, you wouldn't be able to somehow punish the polling place for not being accessible simply because it wasn't within a service corridor. >> DAVID: I understand. We're in agreement. >> JACQUIE: Right. No -- >> DAVID: A transportation entity might say we're excited, we have a bus stop in front of your house, so our service is now accessible to you. In the past we might have said, yeah, it's in front of my house but I still can't get on board because there is no wheelchair access. And we're going through the same thing right now in the world of health records. They are going to say 23 we're going to make the health record accessible to consumers in the sense that they are going to be able to have one. But to be able to get to it -- but they won't be able to use it and read it because of the way you designed it. So this comes up in many sectors of the society. It's actually a reasonable question. >> JACQUIE: No, I agree. This question is since the federal government doesn't currently conduct a 508 certification of electronic and information technology, do you think that's something that will be put into place in the future? >> DAVID: Not in the near future. Our focus right now is simply updating the requirements. That would be a huge deal if the government decided to take that on, and I mention if it did, it might do it incrementally. But there have been no formal discussions about that at this time, but we are looking at the fact that the government does provide certification of this one tiff of technology, the voluntary voting systems. So we're curious. We're going to kind of follow what's happening with the EAC in terms of that certification and the enforcement and how it's working out. >> JACQUIE: Going back a bit, you mentioned college students serving as poll workers. Can high school students do that? Are there specific age requirements or other requirements or do those differ from state to state? >> DAVID: I don't know. I would think that one would need to be over 18, but that's just a guess. I don't know. >> JACQUIE: I don't either. >> DAVID: That doesn't mean that high school students still can't participate in some way and help, they may not just be able to -- they may not be able to serve that specific roll; but we certainly encourage as much 24 participation as possible. So they should contact their elections office to see what the options are available to them. >> JACQUIE: Okay, here is one from New York. Can VVSG mandate a state use an alternative to a full face ballot style on a voting machine? >> DAVID: VVSG mandate that a state -- well, first of all, VVSG isn't a requirement on states. >> JACQUIE: Right. >> DAVID: These are just -- these are guidelines for what the Election Assistance Commission will be using for evaluation of the voting systems. I don't know, I guess that was kind of a mixed question. What was the other half of that? >> JACQUIE: I guess we could -- since that won't be the case, that won't be a mandate, but is there a law that mandates that the state must use an alternative to a full face ballot style on a voting machine? >> DAVID: So I'm trying to understand the barrier. I guess the implication is that the full face ballot style is an accessibility barrier? >> JACQUIE: I would say that that must be what -- >> DAVID: I guess I don't understand enough about that barrier -- because that's real what I makes the question interesting, regardless of what's required is just to understand what the barrier is. What someone's wishes might be from a design perspective. >> JACQUIE: I don't know. Maybe they can write back again and let us know. Okay, that's all the questions I have at this moment. >> DAVID: The VVSG does require design for cognitive accessibility. 25 If having too much information makes it confusing, then one might argue that for cognitive access maybe it should be improved, but the VVSG are really requirements for the machine it sever, the hardware and software, and not on the ballot. Okay, so let us proceed then. >> JACQUIE: Okay. >> DAVID: We're talking about the VVSG and on slide 38 I mention that there are several parts to it. It's actually very thick, but in Part I, that's where we would focus to find out information about accessibility as well as usability and security. Slide 39 is kind of a summary of some of the information in the general part of the VVSG which is kind of like the beginning, the introduction, glossary and so on. And one of the key points it makes in the general part is that the voting system must have intrinsic support for voters. We wouldn't expect somebody to come to the polling place and have to install a screen reader and a booting system to be able to use it. Move on to the next slide, slide 40. Now we're talking about support for voters with visual disabilities. The ability to adjust the size of the text and the contrast to help them see better. In the law, although HAVA didn't mention all the disabilities, it did specifically call out blindness. So very clearly the voting system guidelines needed to do a good job of addressing that as well as the other disabilities. So somebody who is blind would use an audio version of the ballot. They would hear their selection and be able to use some tactile means to enter their selection. They also have the ability to adjust some other things like the rate of speech and the volume and the ability to 26 repeat and skip. You can imagine how important that is rather than listen to a long referendum to be able to skip beyond that. >> JACQUIE: Right. >> DAVID: That wasn't always available. And we used to hear complaints about that. >> JACQUIE: I bet. >> DAVID: Let's move on to the next one, slide 41, synchronizing audio with visual. The point is that some people want to be able to hear it and see it at the same time. And not only is that helpful for people for whom English is a second language, but it might also help some people with learning disabilities, for example. Let's move on to the next slide, 42, support for users with dexterity disability. Some of these requirements are just carry over from the ADA which incorporated them into 508 which then incorporated them into the VVSG. So we look for harmonization where possible among the design requirements. And one of them is that the body cannot be part of an electrical circuit for example to use a touch screen. So actually the voting systems can keep their touch screen, but that just can't be the only way that somebody could vote. There needs to be an alternate to that. And as we move from the 2005VVSG into the next generation, there is going to be this requirement for nonmanual input methods for that that cannot use their hands. So that's a big deal. That's really increasing the breadth -- the net of who is covered by this. So somebody doesn't have arms or is not able to use their arms, how are they going to vote? I don't believe we have a solution for this yet, but it's still in there as a requirement. 27 Let's move on to the next slide. 43, voters with mobility disabilities -- this is where you see the diagrams that provide the appropriate metrics to be able to pull up a forward approach or side approach. We're basically dealing with the issue of reach. Can I reach the various keys I need to do the voting? But there is also a performance requirement here for size. Because I'm in a mobility device, I might need to make some adjustments in text size because of my position. And when they have done some testing to this requirement, they found that sometimes parts of the wheelchair -- like certain nobodies and so on -- might actually bump into parts of the voting system. There is still some difficulty in meeting this requirement. For voters with hearing disabilities, slide 44, it's unlikely that somebody who is deaf or hard of hearing is going to have difficulty voting because they can see the ballot. >> JACQUIE: Right. >> DAVID: But remember some of these design requirements apply to what might be invented in the future. We don't want to make sure we don't slip backwards. If there was ever a voting system design that at first the engineers thought would only be audio, that would pose a barrier to people with hearing disabilities. And with regard to speech disability, slide 45, speech simply disallowed from being a means of operating the machine. I couldn't imagine people just talking to operate the machine or saying their votes out loud. That would conflict with the privacy issue, not to mention that it would be challenging to have something that was user independent. So in slide 46, I'm just kind of being silly. A cat has its own 28 issues touching the fish on the touch screen. In slide 47, the cat is saying no mousing around with a picture of a computer mouse in its mouth; but the point is considering the fact that some people with disabilities can't use these kinds of mechanisms for operating information technology. In slide 48 we have a close-up version of the EZ access keyboard. And instead of having your normal QWERTY keyboard, this is a keypad really with different colors and shapes. So we have a green circle, yellow triangles, a blue diamond with a question mark. So it enables people who were blind to be able to feel these shapes, they are tactilely discernible and it also has a secondary benefit for people with other kinds of disabilities to be able to distinguish these shapes and their functions. But this is how somebody who can't use the touch screen can still go forward and backward and after navigating to find the one -- the selection they want to activate, they are able to cast that or generate that vote. So this is a navigation system. This is half of what would be needed. The other half is to be able to hear the feedback which would be through the headphones. In the next slide, slide 49, I have simply called out one of many of the provisions of VVSG, but this is one I happen to have an illustration for, which is saying that color can't be used as the only means of distinguishing visual elements. If the directions were to say click on green buttons, but I'm colorblind and can't distinguish green from red, this slide indicates you could have the word green on green and red on red and somebody could still distinguish them even if they can't distinguish the colors because they can read the text. On slide 50, there is a provision in the guidelines that the machine not be designed in such a way that requires the user to possess a biological 29 characteristic to use it. So if some day they should ever have a voting system that becomes activated with your fingerprint, this doesn't say you can't use fingerprints, but in addition to that, there needs to be another means of user identification. So in this slide, I'm showing through various technologies how bio metrics are becoming more pervasive. The activate a cell phone, a computer, a mouse, a thumb drive and can I even go to the grocery store now and pay for my groceries by simply placing my fingerprint in the pay by touch machine. We're going the start our cars with a fingerprint, you'll be able to get your hotel rooms with a fingerprint. It wouldn't surprise me if it also gets folded into voting systems one day. Those are just my own thoughts. I haven't heard anybody talking. But it could make some sense. It could be more efficient. Anyway, there is also security issues. A lot of people would take issue with me and say I hand out play doe to the students in my classroom so they all made their fingerprint and broke the security. The next section is called issues. Should I -- let me just tell you the first issue and then we can take some questions after that. We have a picture here GEICO gecko saying it's so easy even a caveman can do it. And the caveman is saying it only took 45 minutes. The American Association of People with Disabilities are talking about that some of these machines were much more difficult for users than they expected. But I don't have any further detail on that. I bet you it's hard to generalize for all of them and improvements have been made, so the past doesn't equal the future on this. This is the kind of thing we want to follow with the upcoming election. And the next slide, Hillary Clinton is saying it's 3:00 a.m., which election official are you going to call for an accessible voting machine 30 demonstration? And the point I'm trying to make in this slide is that if you can't try out the voting machine at the polling place on that day, you are welcome to go to I guess the election administration office or whatever other places they have set up in that jurisdiction to try one out. Of course call them and see if that's available, but that would seem like a reasonable thing to ask for. The government accounting office issued a report about seven years ago indicating that about 80 percent of polling sites had access barriers, and I just thought I'd mention that they plan to do another survey this year so we can do a comparison. The last slide of this series is slide 55 shows the evolution from an ape to modern man, the different types of voting systems, paper, punched, optical scan, DRE, and then at the end of this sequence, you see the man reverting back to monkey and it says paper trails. And that's trying to make the point that in order for a voting system to have -- to provide verification that's accessible and that's secure, many people are feeling like the current solution would be that first you'd vote electronically. Then have that electronic vote converted to paper and then scan that and have it converted back into electronic and that way we can have an independent verification of the vote. And so this slide is trying to illustrate that is a step backward. They are looking at other technologies that might help meet that requirement in the future. After this, I have some resources, information on how to reach me at the Access Board. The next slide, 58, is a reminder that you can order a poster if you want one if you didn't know about this already from another one of the 31 DBTACs. And then I have three slides of resources -- one of the slides needs updating. It's the one for ATAP, that's the association of technology assistance programs. So you can just go to that home page rather than click on that link. And you can get further information including a site they have specifically on HAVA with some useful additional links, including some specifically on accessibility. My parting slide, No. 63, says everything is best for something and worst for something else. So, you know, test screens were exciting, but they also brought new accessibility challenges and that's why we try to write standards that are forward looking so that as new voting systems evolve, we'll be able to apply some of these same principles of accessibility for hearing, vision, speech, cognitive disabilities. And then I have a slide with some of the questions I've asked -- I've answered already. Ready to take more questions. We have about 20 minutes. >> JACQUIE: We have some more. You said that the voting system is required to provide access on several levels. When you talk about the voting system, are you including the entire voting system, that is, the entire process that is used in elections? If voting system is a system in its totality, then does that not mean that absentee voting should be accessible to people with disabilities providing the same level of independence and privacy that accessible machines provide in the polling place? >> DAVID: So really the question is about the scope of the voluntary voting system guidelines. My understanding is that when they said system, they were referring primarily to the interface that the voter would use, the voting machine. 32 Some people believe that should extend further and include some of the other equipment that's used for elections administration. I don't believe it was ever intended to extend beyond that room to the absentee ballot at home. But, on the other hand, we do have some studies of voting for use of the telephone, although I don't believe it was the home phone. Somebody would go to the site where telephones were provided at that local site. And there is always a question about whether somebody might be able to vote through the Internet, but because of concerns about security, it doesn't look like that would be available any time soon. So I guess I am I've just contradicted myself. Basically what I answered is what we were envisioning at the time we were developing the standards, but it wouldn't preclude the possibility that if somehow we were able to meet all the requirements, including those of security and enable one to vote outside a polling place, then the requirements for accessibility would need to extend as far as the voting system extends. So I guess I've just kind of -- I just thought out loud. And I ended up agreeing with the person except I'm not sure if I'd be quick to say that it applied to the absentee ballot. That's what kind of threw me, but I guess one can vote from home, I guess you don't need an absentee ballot anymore. Everybody would be on a level playing field. You could do it in advance or on the day. So we're just talking hypothetically. >> JACQUIE: Right. Here in Oregon we have vote by mail, and we have a new innovative resource being implemented called the alternate format ballot. This does not require an Internet connection, but it does require access to a computer and Internet browser and printer. Also there are accessible voting stations available in each elections office. That said, how do voters in states 33 where they vote at the polling place get equal access to an absentee ballot? And is that something that's being considered? >> DAVID: Thank you. I am reminded of the set up that you have there in Oregon. Thank you. Well, in areas where you vote at the polling place, I believe the accessibility is provided at the polling place. So if somebody is disabled and they can't make it to the polling place, then they would need a reasonable accommodation to help them. And I don't know how far that reasonable accommodation can extend to somebody who can't leave their home. I guess you'd have to contact your local elections office to find out how they would recommend handling that. I guess what they would say is they'd prompt you to see if there is somebody who can assist you and then that person would sign off that they had helped you vote and then you got your accommodation that way. I hope that helps. >> JACQUIE: Kind of interesting. This one is from Tennessee. My state just passed a law requiring paper ballots starting in 2010. Are you aware of any compliance issues on accessibility that are not addressed by the ES and S automark? Are there other equivalents to the automarks from other manufacturers that are in widespread use now? >> DAVID: Well, I haven't personally evaluated all the systems, but one issue that seems to be outstanding across the board is how somebody with a disability would be able to independently verify their vote. So that's certainly something they might want to inquire about. But I do understand that many states are interested in paper because of being able to provide that kind of vote verification. >> JACQUIE: Right. This is in response to the person who asked the 34 question about the full face ball O. she says I believe that the person who asked the question was referring to someone who has a cognitive disability and in that case the voting place is not responsible for breaking up the ballot. The ballot that the voter can bring to vote in order to assist him or her. >> DAVID: That was a comment. I'm not sure what kind of AT they had in mind. >> JACQUIE: I'm not sure either. >> DAVID: Let's imagine that the AT is something simple, like I know somebody with a learning disability who takes a transparent sheet of a different color and places that over a page when they are reading a book and they are able to separate lines better. So if somebody has something as simple as that, equally as simple as the concept of a magnifying glass for example, certainly there is nothing that precludes them from laying that on top, like separating one like from another, but they wouldn't be able to load software into it to break it up into two columns and start highlighting it and things like that. The things we can do with our computers. So that woes confirmation that they were probably talking about cognitive access. And let's remember also that one of the intentions is to have the ballot be more usable for everyone, even if they are not identified as having a learning disability. >> JACQUIE: Right. >> DAVID: So this is a good example of accessibility. But there is a lot of information on that but it's separate of what's required of the machine itself. >> JACQUIE: Right. Correct. Okay, that's all the questions that I 35 have. >> DAVID: Let's look at some of the questions I had. >> JACQUIE: I was just looking at those to see if you had actually answered all of those on the sample FAQ. >> DAVID: I didn't answer the one about compliance, and it's probably going to be a hotline said up that day to receive complaints, but when it comes to complaints about anything in this world, it always makes sense to go through a hierarchy. Depending on what complaint is to contact the poll worker, maybe the judge or Captain at the poll working area to see if they can assist. I had a really interesting story about what happened to me though. When I wanted -- when my voting system wasn't working well, I asked for assistance and they said, well, you're going to have to write down your name and your problem here. And they gave me a clip board with a list of all the people with disabilities who voted that day. >> JACQUIE: Oh, wow. >> DAVID: I'm not going to sign this thing. Then they said you can't vote. That's what they told me. >> JACQUIE: There you go. Oh, wow. >> DAVID: So that escalated and eventually we figured out that actually we had to contact the manufacturer. It was a design defect. In order to move around the ballot, you had to keep your finger on the touch screen. You couldn't release it and then it moved over about a millimeter at a time, very slowly. Nobody knew that. You won't have that problem anymore, but the point was I complained internally and it depends on what the complaint is. If it's an ADA complaint, then there is appropriate avenues for that. You can address 36 that. >> JACQUIE: Yeah. >> DAVID: If it's a complaint about the voting system itself, even then the municipality has a responsibility for complying with whatever their own state law is for voting systems. Sometimes it could be that they just -- it's good feedback about improving the design for the future. It really depends upon what the complaint is. If they have a good suggestion for improving voting systems, they may want to just send those directly to the EAC, especially during that window of opportunity to influence the next round of voting -- voluntary voting systems guidelines. >> JACQUIE: Right. >> DAVID:Can a person with a disability serve as a poll worker? I went through poll worker training and they have this mentality of us and them. We don't have disabilities, but the people who work there, it's just them. >> JACQUIE: I see. >> DAVID: But not completely, because they do recognize that a lot of poll workers are older people. So anyway, the simple answer is yes, certainly a person with a disability can -- and they do -- serve as poll workers. I know somebody who had a stroke and was unemployed, but she always looked forward to election day because she got paid to serve as a judge. And then whatever their needs are, they are entitled to reasonable accommodations. And so there is a famous motivational speaker, W. Mitchell who after having two major accidents said, well, now I can only do 9,000 things instead of 10,000 things. And so the point is there are plenty of things that people with disabilities can do to 37 serve. And they are short of poll workers this year. They need help. >> JACQUIE: Yeah. Good to know. >> DAVID: I'm not the kind of speaker that only leaves five minutes at the end for questions. I tried to leave it open. >> JACQUIE: Well, I'm glad you did. I appreciate that. And we have a ton of questions. There is obviously a lot of interest in this topic and I really appreciate you helping us out this afternoon. And I know that I'm sure that everybody that listened in really got a lot of information that they didn't have. I know I did, and I really appreciate you doing this, David. It was very helpful. >> DAVID: One of the things that people might actually walk away learning from this, it was very clear that there were some things that I felt confident about, and other areas that were kind of blind areas for me, so to speak. And I think that's a useful thing to consider for a moment that nobody knows everything. And that depending on who your speaker is, they'll be able to talk more about one subject, like the ADA or local laws, or another subject with the actual design requirements, and there is other perspectives as well. So that's just a useful thing to keep in mind if you develop a panel on the subject, you probably want a panelist that's, you know, a technical expert, one that understands all the federal organizational bodies, another that understands all the local laws. I actually was part of something like that in the past where we had one person from Department of Justice, one person from the Access Board, and so on, so that way you have a breadth of resource there on the panel to be able to handle a variety of questions. So anyway, if there is something I didn't answer 38 to your satisfaction, please E-mail me and I can get the right contact person to look it up for you. >> JACQUIE: Right. And I'm sure you will hear from people from that. Well, thanks a lot, and you know, nobody ever complains about getting done a little early. So that's great. I want to tell our listeners to please feel free to share the archives of today's presentation with your colleagues. They will be available tomorrow, the transcript of today's webcast at ilru.org, and please don't forget to complete the evaluation that we have on the webcast page. We're really interested in getting your feedback. I want to thank again the National Institute on Disability Rehabilitation and Research, NIDRR, our sponsor for today. And we hope you'll join us for our next webcast next Wednesday, when we're be presenting millennials and the ADA, new issues in higher education. The opinions and views expressed today are those of the presenter and no endorsement of the sponsoring agency should be inferred. And finally, this webcast would not be possible without the efforts of our webcast team: Rob Dickehuth for his amazing technical expertise and our wonderful captioner today, Marie Bryant. Thanks again so much, David, and thanks everybody for joining us. Have a dazzling day. >> DAVID: Thank you. Goodbye.