|

 
|
| | Name : | Jim Dickson | Organization : | American Assoc. of People With Disabilities (AAPD) | Post Date : | 9/30/2005 |
| Comment : | Considering that HAVA funds are provided for a one-time purchase, the
majority of states will not be able to easily move from a "should" system
to a "shall" system and those additional requirements will have little
impact on what is available to consumers for years to come. Unlike other
types of information technology, voting systems do not have a typical
replacement cycle of 3 to 4 years. As a result, planning on incremental
increases in accessibility through subsequent VVSG versions will provide
limited end outcomes for consumers.
In addition, since HAVA requires one "accessible" voting machine per
polling place, the legal benchmark for that one accessible machine will be
the access standards/guidelines currently available. A guideline or
standard with a "should" is not part of what is required to meet the legal
requirement of "accessible" and will have little impact on the market and
buying decisions.
Recommendation: Many of these features are currently available in
products on the market (e.g. many offer switch input, many offer both
synthesized and digitized speech options.) We would recommend that a
mandatory upgrade date be specified for which an Acc-VS must provide these
current "should" features. If an upgrade date is not required, all due
consideration must be given to changing "should's" to "shall's" to the maximum extent possible. | |
|
|