Standardize election processes wherever possible. Standardization is an obvious improvement from a professional quality perspective. Nevertheless, we realize that there are a number of factors that would deter standardization, all of which will have to be considered in the forthcoming national debate over how to fix the system. For example, the costs for replacing obsolete voting technology are carried by local governments, which often do not have resources adequate to the task. And if it comes to a choice between fixing roads or replacing voting machinery, many municipalities will choose to make do with the existing technology.
Some communities are less able to bear the costs.
In addition, political barriers related to local control over election procedures and technologies will not be easily overcome, nor can they be ignored. Finally there is the question of how much standardization is actually desirable. The competitive pressures that force continuous improvement in consumer products, such as television sets, for example, do not exist in the limited markets for public-sector technologies such as voting machines. Perhaps the goal should be uniform reliability of outcomes without dictating what technologies will be used to achieve that level of quality. Develop the will to improve continuously and to apply needed resources to the task.