COUNTING AMERICA’S 40,000,000 VOTES (Nov, 1936)

>>|
Next >>
7 of 7
>>|
Next >>
7 of 7

COUNTING AMERICA’S 40,000,000 VOTES

NEWS of the election of George Washington as first president of the United States was borne by stagecoach in 1789 throughout the country in about three weeks. Barring a close division of the 40,000,000 voters, the outcome of the current contest of .Franklin D. Roosevelt and Alfred M. Landon will be made known to a far vaster country in about three hours after the polls close on Nov. 3. This miracle is made possible by the inclusion unofficially in the archaic Electoral system, itself little changed since Washington’s day, of every device evolved for the counting of votes and the transmission of results. Ingenious voting machines record and count votes at the same time. Adding machines produce instant totals. Motorcycles, telegraph lines, telephones, press association wires, newspapers, and radio stations distribute the results at a speed unequalled in any other country.

Registration figures in cities where this is required indicate that at least a million, possibly four million, more citizens than the 39,816,522 who voted in 1932 will vote this fall. Chicago has a registration this fall of 1,612,173 against 1,429,774 in 1932. In Philadelphia, the figure has increased from 646,564 to 808,644. Milwaukee, Buffalo and San Francisco have record registrations. Counting machinery, however, has increased with the voters. There will be more voting machines in use this fall than ever before. Election figures are born in the east and speed westward faster than the sun. The Massachusetts village of New Ashford takes pride in being the first community in the country to report its vote. In the face of competition from Mount Washington and other neighbors, New Ashford has been first with figures for the last five Presidential elections. In 1932, two of New Bedford’s 34 voters were in the hospital but the remainder began to vote at 5:45 a. m. and at 6:28 a. m., two minutes earlier than in 1928, and while most citizens were still in bed, the count: Hoover 30, Roosevelt 8, was flashed to the country.

Figures from other small points appear on the wires in the course of the day but the first totals of great importance come from the city and state of New York. The election is decided by electoral votes, one for each Senator and Representative, and New York State has 47 of these, the most of any state. In 20 years no candidate has lost New York and won a presidential election.

All of New York City’s 2,225,000 votes are recorded by 4,300 voting machines and something like four-fifths of the 2,000,000 upstate residents vote in the same manner. In the metropolis, policemen stationed at each voting place rush the totals to precinct stations where reporters for the City News Association, the local news gathering organization of the New York newspapers, collate them and transmit them to the newspaper offices. So rapidly is this done that most of the figures are known within an hour or two after the polls close and the complete results are known before midnight. Police help on the upstate figures. In Buffalo, motorcycle officers speed from the edge to the center of the city snatching sheets of totals as they ride. With candidates numerous, and over 218,000 voting, the complete Buffalo vote has been compiled in less than 90 minutes.

The New York totals are made possible by the voting machines. Though used in the metropolis only since 1925, the state has long been the center of voting machine development and use. The first machine used, then known as the Myers Ballot machine, made its appearance in Lockport, N. Y., home of the maker in 1892. Two years later, Rochester and Cazenovia, N. Y., tried the experiment. Buffalo and three more cities followed in 1899. At present 95 per cent of the 30,000 machines in service in 3,500 communities throughout the country are products of the Jamestown, N. Y., factory of the Automatic Voting Machine Corporation.

Voting methods underwent few changes in the 25 centuries prior to the development of the voting machines. Assemblies in ancient Sparta announced their opinions by shouting and beating on shields. Athenians of 500 B. C. voted by a show of hands except on the question of exiling a citizen deemed dangerous to the state. In this case, a secret vote was recorded on a clay ballot. Excavators of the American School of Classical Studies recently uncovered 150 of these at Athens, several bearing the names of Aristides. Early Romans used wax-covered slips of wood as ballots.

Early American voting was about as public as that of Greece and Rome. Up to around 1890 most polling places were surrounded by persuasive and often belligerent persons who forced party ballots on the voter and watched him put them in the box. Employers and political bosses stood about to intimidate the voter. The Australian ballot, so-called because it was first used in South Australia in 1856, substituted a single official one for the many ballots and provided secrecy for its casting. At least five per cent of the ballots under this system, however, are almost invariably improperly marked and are supposed to be thrown out. The possibility of error or fraud, and the unavoidable delay of counting persisted.

Inventors of the voting machine undertook to eliminate these factors. First man to give the problem attention appears to have been Jan Josef Baranowski in Paris, France, in 1849. He suggested that adding machine principles be applied to voting and that a closet be provided in which the voter could make his choice by turning handles or pushing buttons opposite the names of candidates. De Brettes in that year and Werner von Siemens in 1859 in Germany constructed primitive legislative voting machines, operated mechanically to cast either white or black balls. Thomas Edison patented a crude machine in 1869. At about the same time, Vassie, Chamberlain, Sydserff and Davy produced devices in England. All involved balls which had to be counted.

Machines combining voting and counting did not appear until the last years of the 19th century. One of the first was that of Father Vito Leto, a priest at Cimmina, Sicily, with several railroad signal devices to his credit. His device was a box supported by a pedestal and divided into compartments according to the number of candidates. A fitted stylet turned the counting mechanism and a bell rang. Better machines were produced in America by Myers, Bardwell, Abbott and Dean, all using mechanical counters. One made by McTammany had a separate key for each candidate. Holes in a paper web were counted by a pneumatic machine.

These were of varying merit and a few failed so dismally that cities which tried them after 40 years refuse to use machines. The best features of the group, augmented by the notable roller interlock invented by Frank Keiper, survive today in the sturdy machine made at Jamestown. This machine contains 13,000 parts and can be manufactured only at the rate of 10 per day. When Mayor Jimmy Walker ordered 2,000 machines shipped “by airplane” to New York City in time for the 1927 city election, the factory could not supply them.

The machine is a mechanical duplicate of an Australian ballot. Candidates’ names, with a lever by each, extend across the face of the machine in a curtained booth. There is a row for each party and in many states the entire party ticket may be selected by a lever at the left. After placing the indicators in position, the voter records his choice by pulling an overhead lever. This brings the indicators back to position, records and counts the vote, and throws back the curtains. In New York, voters are allowed to spend three minutes at the machines and until they pull the voting lever they can move the indicators about as much as they please. In Connecticut, where party levers are allowed, the time limit is one minute.

Smallest machines now made, selling for $860, have space for the names of 270 candidates. The largest machines will record the votes of nine parties of 70 candidates each, at the same time, provide space for voting on 35 questions or amendments. A machine of this size contains 700 counters in addition to the protective counters showing the total vote. A horizontal paper roll is included to permit the “writing” of candidates whose names do not appear on the keyboard. It is impossible to vote for two candidates for the same office and, if party watchers are alert, the total vote counter and protective counter prevent anyone voting more than once.

Advantages of machines are: (1) a mechanically accurate count, eliminating human error; (2) immediate election returns; (3) elimination of soiled and defective ballots; (4) a permanent record which eliminates expensive recounts and contests; (5) absolute secrecy assured the voter; (6) a reduction in election expenses.

These factors have caused labor unions, whose elections in the past have been matters of great dispute, to adopt the machines. Upwards of 50 unions, principally in New York, Detroit and Cleveland, rent machines for their voting. The University of Buffalo, Pennsylvania State College and George Washington University use machines for student elections.

Where machines are not used, election work is only half done when the votes are cast. They must then be counted with some clerks calling the names and others tallying them. It is a matter of many hours work in larger precincts. Though Boston has but a fifth of the New York City vote, absence of voting machines makes a complete total for the city almost a 48-hour job. A complete Chicago count takes about 24 hours. Despite an efficient police reporting system directed by Walter Gaedke, secretary of the city election commission, 10 to 12 hours are required to gather all of Milwaukee’s 250,000 votes. The city tried and discarded machines in 1903. The Milwaukee Journal is urging their return as an economy measure. A day and a half is often required to count Detroit’s half million votes.

In most sections, the compilation of state totals, which determines to whom the important electoral votes go, are left to the press associations, the United Press, Associated Press and the International News Service. In Texas, however, all of the client and member papers of these services cooperate in the Texas Election Bureau of which A. F. Henning is manager. A former Dallas News man and professor of journalism at Southern Methodist University, he has devised a system of reporting and counting which produces totals faster than in many smaller states. The bureau’s 254 correspondents are given sets of blanks to telegraph at stages of the count to headquarters in the Dallas News. Prizes are offered for the first blank of each set received. The big test of the bureau is the Democratic primary. Last July, 53 per cent of the vast state’s million votes were compiled election night. Counting will be expepedited this fall by use for the first time of 130 voting machines in Dallas.

A notable job of California vote compiling is done by the organization of Registrar William M. Kerr of Los Angeles County where registration this year totals 1,281,590, over 43 per cent of the registration of the state. Voting machines are lacking and two days are required to get in the outlying boxes but so efficient is Kerr’s arrangement that the trend is usually established within two or three hours. This semi-official count is made by 40 central bureaus scattered among the 4,295 precincts. The bureaus telephone partial totals to Registrar Kerr’s office and he compiles the figures for the newspapers. The length of primary ballots discourages the use of machines in California, officials say.

The three press associations compile totals at state bureaus, usually in the state capital, and these, with contests of any local or state interest eliminated, are transmitted to divisional centers. The principal of these are Atlanta, Chicago, Kansas City, San Francisco and Boston. From these centers, the figures speed to a central compiling point for the service. Until 1932, this was New York for all three systems. In that year, however, the Associated Press chose to gather the figures in Washington and will do so again this year.

The telegraph, telephone and radio all were utilized for the transmission of election news as soon as the facilities became available. Radio Station WWJ of the Detroit News broadcast the first election news in the current manner in announcing the results of the Michigan primary election Aug. 31, 1920. On Nov. 2 of the same year, the famous Westinghouse station, KDKA, broadcast news of the election of President Harding. This November virtually every broadcasting station in the country will announce election figures.

3 comments
  1. Eugene says: October 20, 20081:01 pm

    looking forward for more information about this. thanks for sharing. Eugene

  2. StanFlouride says: October 20, 200810:50 pm

    I only wish they’d saved a few of these in a warehouse somewhere (maybe that’s what’s REALLY at Area 51)
    From today’s news:
    Florida Voting Machines Break Down On First Day Of Use
    http://www.huffingtonpo…
    West Virginia voters have reported machines flipping their votes from Democratic to Republican.
    http://wvgazette.com/Ne…

  3. RecordRat says: October 26, 20084:33 pm

    What a great find. We at http://www.re-mediaetc…. are fighting to save the levers in NY. While all voting systems can be defrauded, we interpret the evidence to indicate that the mechanical lever voting machine provides the safest system for our vote. Is this article copyrighted? Can we repost it in full? (we’d link back to this webpage to credit you for the post)

Submit comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.