Jones also sees the regulations themselves as problems. Voting requires standards. Voting machines require standards. But regulatory agencies generally deal with the industries they regulate far more frequently than the public. The result is development of a close, sometimes too close relationship between the regulators and the companies they keep tabs on. He cited The Economist, which said the “Gamekeeper turns poacher, or at least, helps the poacher.”

“The first thing a vendor does before selling machines is go to an independent testing laboratory. They pay the laboratory and say ‘Test this machine and say it meets federal standards,” ’ Jones said, noting that precisely the same process works for electric lamp sales. “This is in fact the accepted standard across a large section of industries. I don’t think that’s that bad. I think the problem is with the standards themselves. There are serious problems with these standards.”

Jones sees voter verification as the solution. He said studies indicate fraud plummets if as few as 10 percent of voters double check their ballots before officially turning them in. The printouts also allow election officials the opportunity to have hand recounts. Hand recounts have saved some areas from disastrous results when machines malfunctioned or when technicians programmed machines improperly. Standards vary on whether states require machines to give voters a printout.

Jones praised Iowa’s laws, which require emergency paper ballots if the voting machines break. It’s not ideal, but it’s better than having the machines break without a backup plan.

“I really think Iowa’s emergency paper ballots come as close to perfect as you can get,” he said.

Still, Jones preferred solution is a bit different. Technology holds promise. He just wishes officials put the same emphasis on research and development as they do on getting the machines into polling places.

Matt Milner can be reached at (641) 683-5359 or via e-mail at mwmilner@mchsi.com.