Editorial:
Design and Politics
As we sit and wonder if we were responsible for a pregnant chad or not, the obvious question for a designer becomes "Who designed this mess anyway, and why isn't there a better design for voting in the U.S.?" Much of the confusion from "butterfly ballots" to counting chads can be directly laid at the alter of design...or perhaps more accurately, non design. Most of us have heard the claims and counter claims of fault in the electoral mess until we are full of it. However, even after a President is finally declared, we won't have this all behind us. Far from it, because at that point the reexamination of the system will begin and focus will change to "changing the system". OK, so how do we as designers get involved? Isn't this after all a political process? Let's explore this whole thing from an Advanced Design perspective.
The primary issue with the butterfly ballots is that the design of the ballots might have confused voters and caused them to select the wrong candidate. If that happened or not isn't all that important from a design standpoint. What is important, rather, is the idea that the ballot as designed could be confusing. That it shouldn't be, is too obvious for statement. But who looks at these things? We know the determination was made by the political officials that the ballots were acceptable. But did anyone with any kind of design expertise have any official input? We doubt it. But if so, will that person(s) please stand up and take responsibility for a failed design analysis. We can be pretty sure that there was no analysis and critique done anywhere of ballot design by anyone trained or experienced to do so. We're not talking about style here, or snappy graphics. Just plain function. The graphics of ballots is as visually pedestrian as you can get. But the logic of the process of voting, must be designed in at that very basic level. It wasn't.
If you move on to the process of reading and marking, things start to get complicated. The butterfly ballot had a layout problem that could have been avoided and wasn't. We heard that grade school kids weren't confused by the butterfly ballot, so that should settle the confusion argument. Well, they aren't confused by video games and VCR programming either. We should all be so lucky! If the design was based on some kind of economic savings then the provider should be sued for fraud and misrepresentation because these ballot designs caused huge costs to be incurred by the Florida counties involved. Any balloting system of course will be designed with operating costs in mind, but who is responsible when the design goes badly as it did in this case? There has been no responsibility placed or claimed. But there were some profits made by the provider of the ballots and voting machines, no doubt. We're not asking for a pound of flesh here. Just responsibility and understanding that it is very cost effective to have a good design and to involve designers in the process. Something that any provider should be accountable to do.
As you move beyond the graphics and layout of the ballot itself, the whole methodology of casting votes comes into the design realm. Has anybody taken a look at the ergonomics of voting ballots? Just as graphic presentation and layout are issues, so are the ergonomics of vote casting. That punching stylus of the Votomatic machine is a challenge to anyone who lacks finger dexterity. Access to some of the voting booths can be improved as well. Did the providers of these systems really take all that into account? Or was their primary focus on putting out something that could be made cheaply and mass produced easily. Nothing wrong with that but the design requirements don't stop there.
We have heard from one of the inventors of the Votomatic machine. He is William Rouverol, professor emeritus at UC Berkeley. Apparently in 1962, he and a Political Science professor, Joe Harris, invented the punch card system so that machine counting could be used to speed up the election returns. According to a San Francisco Chronical report by Eric Brazil, Mr. Rouverol explained that after their patent expired in 1982 Votomatic machines used cards with plastic backing rather than the rubber that was previously used under their patent. This new backing is what Mr. Rouverol attributes to the problem with the chads not being cleanly punched from the voting card. So, we can surmise that plastic backing has disenfranchised millions of voters over the last 18 years because ballots with problem chads are NOT counted by the machines designed specifically for the purpose of counting votes. This isn't even a difficult design problem to correct! Go back to rubber. But who says? Who, analyzes and evaluates? Who cares?
Well as it turns out, now people around the globe care because the problem the United States has with electing a president affects people everywhere. The leader we choose to be the president of the only remaining super power nation , and the head of the world's most successful democracy is of extreme importance to the world. And of course, there is no greater irony than the champion of technological innovation not being able to put together a voting system that works! So now the design issue really becomes complex. The whole system of voting in the United States is under examination. Good! A better case for design couldn't be found. If any of these problems from typeface to the electoral college are to be made responsive to the intent of the wishes of the electorate, then a new design is called for. Yes, politics will interfere. But politics should be part of the design effort. It shouldn't be a matter of adjusting the present system to satisfy special interests, or to conform to political preference, or to address state's rights issues. The design intent should be to design a system of electing representatives under the umbrella of the Constitution that is responsive to the desires of the individual citizen. This is a grand design opportunity of immense magnitude that could involve all areas of design; graphic design, product design, hardware & software design, architecture, social systems design, and more. This design process should begin at the very beginning and involve all appropriate entities.
The beginning of this design is the design of the design itself. It is essential to design the process so that the design work will be effective and responsive. All the elements of Advanced Design should be put into play in this effort. From the very start of the design process, there should be in place not only the talent and resources but the clear expression of design intent and mission statement. The Advanced Design Institute stands ready to take the leadership role in the design of the design. We offer our services to whichever agency is put in charge. We are ready to go to work. Any takers?