[House Hearing, 109 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
HEARING ON SECURING THE VOTE: NEW MEXICO
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
HEARING HELD IN LAS CRUCES, NM, AUGUST 3, 2006
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
30-169 WASHINGTON : 2006
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION
VERNON EHLERS, Chairman
Robert W. Ney, Ohio Juanita Millender-McDonald,
John L. Mica, Florida California, Ranking Minority
Candice Miller, Michigan Member
John T. Doolittle, California Robert A. Brady, Pennsylvania
Thomas M. Reynolds, New York Zoe Lofgren, California
Professional Staff
Will Plaster, Staff Director
George Shevlin, Minority Staff Director
SECURING THE VOTE: NEW MEXICO
----------
THURSDAY, AUGUST 3, 2006
House of Representatives,
Committee on House Administration,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to call, at 9 a.m., at the
Memorial Medical Center, Conference Room A and B, 2450 Telshor
Boulevard, Las Cruces, New Mexico, Hon. Vernon J. Ehlers
(chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Ehlers and Lofgren.
Also Present: Representative Pearce.
Staff Present: Peter T. Sloan, Professional Staff.
The Chairman. The Committee will come to order.
I'm very pleased to be in Las Cruces. I hate to admit it,
this is my first time here. And I have been in New Mexico many
times, but never in this corner.
I have to admit I was surprised to find it 20 degrees
cooler than my home state of Michigan. It's usually the other
way around. But we are having a heat wave, and you're having
cool weather and rain.
First of all, I would like to ask all members of our
audience here today to please silence all cellular phones,
pagers, other electronic equipment to prevent interruption of
the hearing. It is very disconcerting for a witness, who is
terrified to be in front of terrible people like me, to
suddenly have a phone ringing behind them. So please turn off
all your electronic equipment. Thank you very much.
Also, a few housekeeping items we need to attend to before
the beginning of the hearing. Due to strict time limits, the
Chair will be enforcing the five-minute rule for timing of both
witnesses and members. This means that witnesses are limited to
a five-minute time frame for their presentation, and that
members, when they ask questions, will be limited to a five-
minute time frame for questioning.
Without our usual timing machines available to indicate
when the five-minute time frame has elapsed--you see, in the
Congress, we have lights that go off and trapdoors that open up
if we speak too long. We don't have that here, so I will simply
tap my gavel on the block once to indicate that four minutes is
up. And then, at five minutes, I'll remind you again. And I
will do the same with member questions as well. And I ask
everyone to try to be brief when answering questions of
members.
There are a number of witnesses here, and we have three
members of Congress here who will be asking questions. So we'd
like to give everyone an opportunity to say everything they
want to say or ask everything they want to ask.
I'm very pleased to introduce the other members of the
panel. By the way, I'm Vernon Ehlers from Michigan. I'm Chair
of the Committee on House Administration.
And to my left is Ms. Zoe Lofgren from the San Francisco
Bay area--the southern Bay area, a very valued member of the
committee, also an attorney, which is always helpful to us.
And to my right, a member of the House of Representatives
from the wonderful State of New Mexico, Steve Pearce. We're in
his territory. He was good enough to join us.
And I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from New
Mexico, Representative Steven Pearce, be allowed to join us on
the dais today, that he may be able to ask questions of the
witnesses, enter a statement into the record, and preside for
brief occasions if the Chair has to leave. Without objection,
so ordered.
We just have to go through that formality to welcome him
and give him the privilege of speaking and asking questions.
The committee is very pleased to be here today in Las
Cruces for a field hearing on securing the vote. Today the
committee will be looking into the issues raised by
identification requirements and voting by non-citizens in
federal elections.
New Mexico has been grappling with these issues at the
state level. And I thought, personally, that you would probably
know a great deal about this and could be very helpful to us.
So the committee hopes to gain some insight and perspective
today by hearing from people who have been dealing with these
issues firsthand. In short, we want to learn from you.
My goal is very simple: To ensure that every citizen's vote
in this nation will be accurately counted, and that everyone
who wishes to vote will be allowed to vote, and that his or her
vote will not be diluted by illegal votes or fraudulent
miscounting of votes.
Those who doubt that every vote matters need only look to
New Mexico. The margins of victory in this state in each of the
last two presidential elections show the importance of every
single vote.
In the election of 2000, Presidential Candidate Al Gore won
the popular vote in New Mexico by just 365 votes out of almost
600,000 cast. Incidentally, the margin in Florida that year was
537, a more populous state. In 2004, President Bush won the
popular vote in New Mexico by a slightly larger margin of 5,988
votes out of 756,000 cast.
These slim margins of victory highlight the importance of
ensuring that every vote cast in an election is a valid one,
cast by an eligible citizen and accurately recorded. While
there may be disagreement over the scope and magnitude of
voting errors and fraud, these numbers clearly demonstrate that
when the margins are this close, even a small amount of fraud
or error can sway an election.
New Mexico has dealt with many election reforms, including
identification requirements. While New Mexico's state
legislature has passed an ID bill, debate continues in the
state about the sufficiency and effectiveness of this law and
whether or not it provides adequate protections to ensure
electoral integrity. Elections are too important to be operated
on an honor system. We cannot rely upon the honor of those
among us who are inclined to commit fraud. We must ensure that
we have procedures in place that protect the franchise.
It has often been said that the purpose of the Help America
Vote Act, better known as HAVA, was to make it easier to vote
and harder to cheat. The election that will occur in November
will be the first national election to occur with all the
requirements of HAVA in place. Today's hearing will give us an
opportunity to hear more about what is being done in the states
to protect the franchise. And we do plan to carry this hearing
to a number of different states so we can learn from a number
of different localities.
I certainly look forward to getting some outside-the-
beltway perspective on these issues. And I'm sure you've all
heard about the problems inside the beltway.
I thank all of our witnesses for coming. I look forward to
their testimony.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.003
The Chairman. At this time, I would like to recognize my
fellow committee member, Ms. Zoe Lofgren, for any opening
remarks she may have.
Ms. Lofgren. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And as with you, I thank the people of Las Cruces for their
hospitality. This is also my first time for being in Las
Cruces, and it's a lovely place.
I will say that with gas at $3.46 a gallon the last time I
filled up, and with Israel and Hezbollah in a terrific fight
that threatens the peace and the stability of the world, with
the situation in Iraq unabated, and the Secretary of Defense on
the hot seat right now before the Senate Armed Services
Committee, it does seem that this is not the most important
issue that faces our nation today.
However, I came here today to make sure that there was full
attendance from the committee. I do believe with this, the
first hearing that we've had on this subject, and the hearing
that we held in Washington provided almost no evidence that
people who are here illegally are voting, but it did provide
substantial evidence that individuals who might be asked to
prove with a photo ID that they were citizens would
disproportionately--Americans would disproportionately be
disadvantaged.
And in fact, the evidence that we received in our hearing
in Washington indicated that those who would be most
disadvantaged by the photo ID requirement, American citizens,
would be African-Americans. And in fact, there was a study done
in Milwaukee--I was astounded by this result, but when you
think about it, it makes sense--that among African-American
men, age 18 to 24, 78 percent of those young men, American
citizens, did not have a driver's license or other photo ID.
Why? Because they didn't have any money, and they didn't have a
car.
And so the HAVA act was meant to put some order in the
system, but the real effort was to make sure that Americans had
an opportunity to fully vote and participate in elections.
Everybody knows that only Americans are allowed to vote. There
is no dispute on that. So any effort that would go after kind
of a phantom problem, and in the process, disadvantage large
numbers of Americans who want to be able to vote would be the
wrong--the wrong approach, in my judgment.
Now, I--as the Chairman knows, I have a great deal of
respect for Chairman Ehlers. We've served together not only on
this committee and on the Science Committee, so this comment
does not relate to him but to his party. This hearing is really
part of a pattern throughout this recess, and I think it's
important to put this into context. There are, as I counted, 27
so-called field hearings on immigration being held by various
committees around the country.Appropriations, Armed Services,
Education, Workforce, Government Reform, Homeland Security, the
Intelligence Committee, the International Relations Committee, the
Judiciary Committee, the Science Committee, the Ways and Means
Committee, all are out holding hearings on immigration. And I think
it's pretty clear that it's an effort to try and stir up an issue for
political ends, and I think that that is unfortunate.
I will say that I will listen very carefully to all the
testimony. I'm very honored that people took the time and made
the effort to be here. The fact that this is a politicized
effort is not the problem of the witnesses who have taken their
time to be here, but I do think that that is what the game plan
is for the party. And I'm here really to call attention to that
fact and also to fully participate.
So thank you, Mr. Chairman, for recognizing me for my
statement. I look forward to further questions of the
witnesses.
The Chairman. Thank you for your comments.
One thing I neglected to announce, we do not permit
applause. Occasional laughter, maybe, if you have a reason for
it, but no applause or other demonstrations. We like to
maintain a decorum in the committee.
Next, I'm pleased to welcome your Representative Steven
Pearce to make his opening statement.
Mr. Pearce. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to
visit and be a part of this panel. I don't normally sit on the
committee, and so it's only with the consent of all members
that I sit here. So I appreciate that and welcome you to the
district, you and Ms. Lofgren. I would just kindly request that
before you leave town, you spend lots of money.
We--you are being treated to an unusual sight in New
Mexico, and that's rain. Yesterday, I had a constituent saying,
We're always praying for rain. Now we probably need to pray for
it to stop. And I would just like to caution my constituents,
last time we prayed for it stop, it quit for 12 years. So let's
ask that it slow down a bit.
But we are dealing with the water quite well in most
circumstances and help is going to different districts.
We are joined today by Suzie Cordero from Senator
Domenici's office. I saw Representative Mary Helen Garcia, who
I went to the legislature with at my freshman year. We were
both freshmen together. Served on the Appropriations
Committee--ah, right here in the front row--a great public
servant.
Representative Joseph Cervantes is somewhere in the
audience, way in the back. We appreciate you coming out today.
Another fine representative.
And Bishop Ricardo Ramirez is here this morning. I got a
letter from him when I voted against the bill that our office
almost completely crafted. We did about 75 percent of the work
on the House Immigration Bill, and then certain pieces of it
were added on the floor which we felt like extended it too far,
and voted against that. We appreciate that letter of support.
Beginning right after the 2002 election, we submitted
information to the House of Representatives about fraud that
was occurring in the election process where I was elected. In
fact, everyone in this county knows that the county clerk from
that point--from that period of time of 2002, Ruben Ceballos,
was actually indicted on more than 10 counts of voter fraud and
eventually convicted of that.
And so I think, Mr. Ehlers, that I'm glad you're here
talking about the broader aspect of voter reform.
As it eases up to the question of illegals voting, I would
just urge caution because 47 percent of the members of this
district are Hispanic, and I would hate for the attempt to find
the illegals voting would cross across the line and begin to
just identify randomly, because many people have been here
longer than my family--Hispanic residents, they have been here
longer than my family. And I would urge caution at that point.
But I appreciate the fact that you're here.
The immigration issue does not need stirring up. It's been
about as hot and as volatile as any issue that we have. And so
if it takes 27 field hearings to--to really get closer to the
truth, I think we should take the time to get closer to the
truth; that we should know when we pass legislation in
Congress, that it is actually reflective of the will of the
people.
And so I appreciate the fact that you're here, the fact
that you're taking the testimony of people from New Mexico,
because I think that--that it's one of the most important
issues. If we, as American people, lose confidence in the
voting system and in our right to vote and in the sacredness of
our vote, we will go a long ways to undermining the democracy
and the freedom that we're fighting for in other countries at
this particular time.
So I look forward to the testimony today, and we look
forward to being able to question witnesses.
I thank again the Chairman for his indulgence to sit on the
committee.
The Chairman. Thank you very much and I appreciate your
presence.
I also want to mention that we have a representative from
Senator Domenici's office here as well, and I appreciate that.
I've worked with Senator Domenici on a number of issues. We are
both interested in science--I'm a scientist. He sits on
committees that deal with science, and we have been able to
collaborate on some important issues, and he's a very fine
senator. I'm pleased you sent him to Washington.
I'd also like to clarify a point which was made by Mr.
Pearce, and that is, this not a hearing devoted to talking
about illegal immigrants. I've been on the House Administration
Committee, which is responsible for election issues, been on
that committee for quite a few years now. And it was astounding
to me--because I always assumed Americans were honest, they
would vote honestly and so forth, I was just astounded at the
number of illegal votes that get cast. I remember particularly
an election in North Carolina which we had to oversee, and the
fraud that was there was just incredible.
So don't misunderstand the purpose of the hearing. I am
opposed to all illegal voting. I'm also very strongly in favor
of everyone voting who wishes to vote and is legally entitled
to do that.
I would like to welcome our first and only panel of the
day. We have with us the Representative Justine Fox-Young of
the New Mexico House of Representatives; Vickie Perea, a former
member of the Albuquerque City Council; Daniel Bryant, an
attorney; Jennifer Hensley, an advocate with the New Mexico
Protection and Advocacy System, Incorporated; Kimmeth Yazzi,
the program and project specialist with the Navajo Election
Administration; and Kathleen Walker--I'm sorry, there you are--
partner at Kemp Smith. Welcome all, and we look forward to your
testimony.
All right. It's my pleasure today to introduce
Representative Fox-Young. And you have five minutes for your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF JUSTINE FOX-YOUNG, NEW MEXICO STATE
REPRESENTATIVE, HOUSE DISTRICT 30
Ms. Fox-Young. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the
committee. Thank you for the invitation to testify today. We
are happy to have you in New Mexico.
My name is Justine Fox-Young. I serve in the New Mexico
House of Representatives, in District 30 in Albuquerque.
I drove down this morning. We do a lot of driving in New
Mexico. It's a big state, and there's a lot of country to
cover. But I drove down, and I was reminded of the--what are
here famous words, of Lou Wallace, who was the territorial
governor from 1878 to 1881, who said that ``All calculations
based on our experiences elsewhere fail in New Mexico.''
This is--as I came into first light coming into Truth or
Consequences, New Mexico, and a parasailer came over the
highway about 50 feet above me and kind of cruised on, just
coasting over. Shortly after that, a light rain started, which
turned to driving rain. And then coming into Cruces, the sky
opened, the light came down, and it was just absolutely lovely,
as it often is here.
But I just think it's important--and as the committee is
acutely aware, each state is different, and we all have our
preferences as elections are concerned. New Mexico certainly
has its idiosyncrasies, but it's important to note that our
local election officials do an extraordinary job with the
resources that they have.
I, personally, in state legislature, have carried a number
of election reform bills covering voter ID, provisional
ballots, counting procedures, voting machine testing procedures
and others. And I think there are few issues more important
than ensuring free and fair elections in New Mexico. So I'm
here today because of my concern for the election process here.
On the issue of illegal immigrants voting here, it's
extremely difficult to quantify the problem because we have no
database. Although I know that many federal and state agencies
have the components to do it, we have no data available to
local officials to validate citizenship and--alongside voter
registration polls. So I think it's very clear, based upon all
the evidence from the 2000 election and 2004 election and
others that the potential for fraud exists here as it relates
to illegal immigrants, but it's difficult to quantify.
I'd just say that in the months leading up to the general
election in 2004, there were over 150,000 new registrants in
New Mexico. There are significant incentives for 527 groups and
their agents to register new registrants all over the country.
Here, we finally reached the million mark in 2004 with over a
15 percent increase in registrants. And in Bernalillo County
alone, there were over 3,000 registrations caught, so to speak,
by the Bernalillo County Clerk.
And I've included examples here. I won't go through all of
them. However, if you look at Exhibit A briefly, the sorts of
things that we've seen here aren't, I'm sure, terribly
different from what you see in other states, but numerous
duplicate registrations at single addresses, 13- and 15-year-
olds registered to vote.
There is a letter, in Exhibit A, from an individual, Mr.
James Dickey from Tucson, Arizona, who received a voter
registration card here in New Mexico despite the fact that he
had not been a New Mexico resident for over nine years. He had
to petition to be removed from the voter roster. This is not
unusual. In fact, as I said, you know, we have seen thousands
and thousands of these and continue to do so.
Exhibit B includes examples from the 2000 election that are
very similar. Instances where individuals who appear to be
deceased here in Dona Ana County, for whom obituaries ran, were
present on the 2000 voter roster and voted. Clear--clear
indicators that there is a problem. Not necessarily an
absolute. But our state election officials have not, to my
mind, adequately addressed some of these issues.
In each case where we find what appears to be fraudulent--
and some fraudulent registration and fraudulent voting, there
is no systematic method for detecting this. Even after HAVA,
even after the election reforms that we've put in place here,
even after the very loose sort of voter IDs that the
legislature passed in the last election, sometimes, you know,
through a fortuitous sequence of events, we find things. More
often than that, we don't.
And so I'm in no position to produce a credible figure of
the number of fraudulent votes that there may be and certainly
of the number of illegal immigrants who are registered to vote.
However, I can tell you that in New Mexico over--now, like over
30,000 individuals who are illegal immigrants have received
driver's licenses, and every single one of them is asked
whether or not they would like to register to vote as part of
the Motor Voter Act. And so there--there are likely huge
numbers who did subsequently register. We have anecdotal
information that this committee has seen on that issue.
On the general issue of voter ID, it's reasonable to assume
that the individuals, the population who are perhaps most
suspicious of the voting process here and anywhere else are new
registrants. In 2004, a national polling firm conducted a poll
of 500 new registrants, and that is attached--the key findings
of that poll are attached as Exhibit C in my testimony--and
found that 99 percent of those folks, if asked to produce some
form of ID, would be happy to, that it wasn't an overly
burdensome request and it wouldn't prevent them from voting. So
a summary of key findings is there.
But the second important development on this issue, the
general voter identification in New Mexico, the city of
Albuquerque recently enacted a new ordinance, which is a strict
voter ID ordinance--photo voter ID. And unlike some other
areas, we did provide free ID for these folks and that has
worked beautifully and worked beautifully in the last general
election.
Is that five minutes?
The Chairman. Yes.
Ms. Fox-Young. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you very much for your testimony.
[The statement of Ms. Fox-Young follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.073
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.075
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.076
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.077
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.078
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.079
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.080
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.081
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.082
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.083
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.084
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.085
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.086
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.087
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.088
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.089
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.090
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.091
The Chairman. Next we go to Ms. Perea.
STATEMENT OF VICKIE PEREA, PRESIDENT, ALBUQUERQUE CITY COUNCIL
Ms. Perea. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's an honor for me to
come before you today to talk about a relevant and important
issue to the state of New Mexico.
My name is Vickie Perea. I'm a lifelong New Mexican, a wife
of 43 years, a mother of two, and grandmother of two. I have
served as a City Councilor and eventually City Council
President in Albuquerque.
Over the last two years, I've had the opportunity to study
the history of elections management in New Mexico. And I
appreciate your willingness to come to New Mexico to discuss
this issue.
At this time, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to walk you through a
brief Power Point presentation that details only a small part
of the fraud that has existed in New Mexico's election system
and how true voter identification could help to stop future
fraud.
I'll begin with the most blatant examples of votes being
stolen from New Mexico voters in 2004. Rosemary McGee is a
Bernalillo County voter who tried to vote on election day in
2004, only to find that someone else had signed the voting
roster in her place early in the day and spelling her name
wrong. She voted on a provisional ballot, and later learned
that her legal vote was not counted. You can see the voting
roster on this slide with Rosemary's actual signature on the
bottom and the signature of the person who voted in her place
on the top. On the next slide, you can see the ``No'' box
checked and circled, indicating that her legal vote was not
counted.
Unidentified Speaker 1. Can you turn out some of the lights
up front so we can see it?
Mr. Pearce. There's a screen behind you as well. You may be
able to get a better look at the back.
The Chairman. Yeah. You can also look behind you.
Ms. Perea. But Rosemary is not the only one. This also
happened to Dwight Adkins, Kim Wistrand, Stephanie Ortiz,
Heather Philpot and Frank Sanchez. Six voters who we know about
whose votes were taken from them in 2004.
I believe that a true voter identification measure is the
foundation of a secure election system, and all of these people
would have been able to cast a ballot and have it counted if
voters had been required to show a photo voter ID.
But let me now briefly walk you through a past history of
voter problems, beginning with the very early example, in 1992,
with Elodia Candelaria, a community activist in Albuquerque who
was convicted of embezzlement and voter fraud. In 1997, Rio
Arriba County's Deputy Clerk, Henrietta Sandoval-Smith, was
convicted of voter fraud, saying at the trial, ``I've always
been guilty.'' She was part of an extensive voter fraud ring in
which 19 people were indicted on voter fraud charges, including
city councilors, a school board chairman, a party chairman, a
state police captain, a city manager and others. These charges
included false swearing, false voting, falsifying voter
registration forms and unlawfully opening ballot boxes and so
on.
Rio Arriba County Clerk David Chavez and his deputy clerk,
Vicky Martinez, were two of those who were found guilty and
sentenced to jail time, with testimony indicating that they had
illegally opened ballot boxes in the '96 primary and the 1997
special election, one time with bolt cutters from the local
jail.
This is not the only county clerk to be convicted of fraud,
however. In 2003, Dona Ana County Clerk Ruben Ceballos was
convicted of five counts of violating New Mexico Election Code.
In 2000, a district judge claimed that the New Mexico
election had been compromised and the ballot box containing 252
ballots went missing in Bernalillo County. A locked ballot box
was later found in the back room of a warehouse containing
about 250 ballots.
In 2004, during the canvassing of the thousands of
provisional ballots in Bernalillo County, the county clerk
noted that her workers had seen approximately two dozen
instances of double voting, meaning that at least 24 voters had
attempted to vote two times in that election.
And also, in 2004, we saw significant problems with the 527
voter registration organizations. In addition to dropping off
droves of fraudulent registration forms to county clerks in New
Mexico--many were caught before being processed--there were a
number of instances where forms were processed and illegal
voters were registered or registered voters were re-registered
without their knowledge and oftentimes under incorrect Social
Security numbers.
For example, a police officer named Glen Stout received a
voter registration card for his 13-year-old son and another one
for a 15-year-old neighbor, both of whom had been registered to
vote by an ACORN employee. Stout worried that these cards would
have been sent to another address and someone less honest than
he would have been--would have used them to vote on election
day under his son's name.
A Tucson, Arizona man received a voter card in his mail. An
ACORN employee was found to have registered the man in
Albuquerque without his knowledge. And we know that fraudulent
registrations have been submitted by ACORN in Denver, and
employees who have been fired for fraud in Ohio.
In other instances, police raided an Albuquerque home for a
drug search, only to find fraudulent voter registration forms
at the house, along with a crack pipe. The individual was being
paid $5 for each registration form that he turned in. There
were also reports of deceased individuals being registered to
vote.
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm running out of time with you
today, but know that true election reform has been called for
by good people on both sides of the political aisle and by the
editorial boards of newspapers and other publications
throughout New Mexico.
And in the municipal election in 2005, Albuquerque voters
overwhelmingly supported a photo voter identification provision
with approximately 73 percent approval.
I believe strongly that a system in which voters are
required to show photo ID to vote will prevent much of the
voter fraud that we see in our election system today. It is a
measure that can be fairly applied so as not to disenfranchise
a single voter, and it would go a long way to increasing ballot
security in New Mexico.
And in a system with a photo ID provision, falsely
registering voters would be a pointless endeavor because voting
under their name would all but be impossible.
I would like to thank you again for spending time in our
beautiful state. I love New Mexico and all that it has to
offer. I just know that our children deserve a clean, fair and
honest democratic process.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you.
[The statement of Ms. Perea follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.092
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.093
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.094
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.095
The Chairman. Mr. Bryant.
STATEMENT OF DANIEL A. BRYANT, ESQ., GENERAL COUNSEL, OTERO
COUNTY, NEW MEXICO
Mr. Bryant. Thank you--pardon me. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It's a pleasure to be here today. I had prepared myself to
welcome you to sunny New Mexico, and I have to tell you I'm
delighted that I can't welcome you to sunny New Mexico. We are
happy for the rain.
I live in rural New Mexico up in the mountains north of
Ruidoso, in Lincoln County. I'm married. I have five children.
I'm a lawyer. I've practiced here for 28 years.
I've represented Otero County as their general counsel that
entire time. And I have been on-site in the county clerk's
office from about 5:00 a.m. in the morning until God knows when
at night for every election every two years ever since. And
I've seen a lot of things happen.
And I just want to express, initially, the opinion that in
terms of voter registration and voter ID and ensuring that the
person who is either signing an absentee ballot or an early
ballot roster or a voter roster on election day is the person
who is on the list at the address, in New Mexico, the system is
just broken. In fact, it just doesn't exist.
The examples that Ms. Perea has just shared with you are
spread all over the state of New Mexico. I have been working
with a group of volunteers associated with the Republican party
here in Dona Ana County, and they have been working for more
than two years looking at some of the issues that have come up
in elections here. And frankly, it's frightening.
When we heard about New Mexico's voter ID law, and we
looked at how it was going to work, frankly, we chuckled. It
was a joke from the start. And we've seen very similar
processes and similar problems happen here.
Once the voter ID cards started coming out, Cecilia
Levitino, who is with us in the audience today, has lived at
her address for more than four years. And she received her
voter ID card and was delighted. And a few days later, she
received another voter ID card in the name of Karen Wright at
the same address. Ms. Wright hadn't lived there for more than
four years.
Now, if Ms. Levitino wasn't a committed American and a
dedicated, ethical person, she'd have the opportunity to go to
the poll and vote each one of those ID cards and exacerbate the
problem here in New Mexico.
In the 2006 primary election, to give you a recent example,
Mr. Sid Goddard, the chair of the local party--I'm representing
them, and they said, ``Dan, what can we do? How can we bring
some legitimacy and verifiability to the election process
here?''
And I said, ``Well, you know, the most important thing we
can do is be visible. We'll stop 85 percent of it if we'll just
let them know we are here, and you need to watch us, and we're
watching you.
Well, Mr. Goddard was in the county clerk's office after
the polls had closed on election night. And a young man walked
in and he had a stack of absentee ballots, about 30 of them.
And he walked up to the counter, and he said, ``Who do I give
these to.''
And the young clerk asked him what his name was, and he
shared that with her. And she said, ``Well, where did you get
these?''
And he said, ``Well, Lupe gave them to me.''
And then she asked him, ``Well, what precinct are you
from?''
And he said, ``Well, I'm down by Sunland Park and
Anthony.''
And because Mr. Goddard was there and because he was taking
notes and watching, those ballots were taken around to the
Absentee Voter Precinct Board, and they were instructed that
night to reject those. And they counted them, and it turned
out, in that instance, we caught 27.
How many got delivered in that fashion that we didn't
catch? An effective voter ID registration system and photo ID
for voting would prevent a significant part of that.
I've been involved in enough elections that I don't want to
sit here and tell you that it's my opinion that photo ID is
going to solve it all. But what it is, is it is the essential,
the critical first step in creating a system that really
guarantees to Americans that their vote counts.
I've got another volunteer with me in the room today, Mr.
Tom Walker, and he's been doing some work, and we've asked him
to look at just one precinct here in the county. And so he
started looking at the voter registration list and he started
checking addresses. We looked for deceased voters. We found
over 60 deceased voters that are still on the voter
registration list.
We then did some more analysis just to take a look at it,
and we were able to see, by looking back at the voter rosters
and the lists of who voted in prior elections, that many of
those 60 voters had voted every election, year after year after
year, and then it cut off and it stopped and you see a break
for four or five years, you know something has happened.
New Mexico has a law. The Bureau of Vital Statistics
provides a list to the county clerks. The county clerks are
supposed to take that list and remove those deceased persons
from the voter rolls. It isn't happening. Every one of those
votes--every one of those registrations that's still on the
list is a potential for a fraudulent vote. Why? Because I walk
in and I say, ``My name is Fred Jones.'' And they look on their
roster, and Fred Jones is on the roster. I reach out with my
pen. I sign my name. They hand me a card. I go to the machine
and I vote. And that is what we do when we vote on election day
in New Mexico.
There is no way to stop me from voting if I know Mr. Jones
is dead and I know that he's still on the registration polls.
If I had to show you an ID, and I had to get an ID that looked
like this, and it said Dan Bryant, I couldn't have voted for
Mr. Jones.
It's a critical first step in helping to solve this problem
and create some confidence in our voting.
The Chairman. Thank you very much for your testimony.
[The statement of Mr. Bryant follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.096
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.097
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.098
The Chairman. Please to recognize Ms. Walker.
STATEMENT OF KATHLEEN CAMPBELL WALKER, PRESIDENT-ELECT,
AMERICAN IMMIGRATION LAWYERS ASSOCIATION
Ms. Walker. Good morning, Chairman Ehlers, Representative
Pearce and Representative Lofgren. Thank you for the
opportunity to provide testimony this morning.
My name is Kathleen Campbell Walker. I am president-elect
of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. It is an
association affiliated with the ABA, American Bar Association,
in existence since 1946. And we have about 10,000 lawyers as
members nationally.
I'm here today to try to address the immigration law side
of the equation. I am obviously not a Voting Rights Act expert.
I will profess to at least know something about immigration law
after practicing for 21 years here in El Paso, Texas--here, a
little farther down on the border, I should say.
What I'm very concerned about is that we obviously need to
keep the right to vote sacrosanct. But when we talk about the
issue of identity, that particular issue has permeated the area
of immigration law in almost every facet, and especially, of
course, since 9/11, and it should. But the issue that we are
trying to deal with, in a voting perspective, is establishing
citizenship.
Now, in trying to prepare for this hearing, I went through
Proposition 200 in Arizona, Representative Hyde's 4844 bill,
and Mr. Tancredo's 5915 bill recently introduced, and the idea
is trying to prove citizenship. Well, in the immigration field,
that's something that is sacrosanct as well. In order to truly
establish citizenship, there are a few documents that the
federal government considers acceptable to establish that you
are a citizen. And when we're, just as we've heard from other
members of this panel, having difficulties in just basic ID, I
can only imagine the horror that would be created in attempting
to truly establish whether or not some voter is indeed a U.S.
citizen.
Let me try to outline some issues that unfortunately the
Department of Homeland Security and the Department of State are
frontally against the wall in dealing with this issue.
Identity is not citizenship. Identity you might see in
Proposition 200 as being established by utility bills as an
alternative form of record, or even a birth certificate--and
I've got to tell you that if you want to look at the 9/11
Commission's report, we have a problem in the lack of
consistency or authenticity procedures concerning our birth
certificates. So what do we rely upon when we are looking at
someone entering the United States to establish they're a U.S.
citizen?
As it stands right now, I'm sure you all have heard about
the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, a program or a--it's
based on the Terrorism Prevention Act in 2004 that would
require U.S. citizens and Canadians coming back from a visit to
Mexico or Canada, for example, to be able to prove that they
are U.S. citizens. And if you look at the documentation of
about how many citizens we have that are crossing our northern
and southern borders that would need passports--I just wanted
to make a quick reference--in fiscal year 2001, there were
314,346,000 inspections on the southern border. Of those
inspections 93 million were U.S. citizens. If I look on the
northern border, about 100 million inspections were made in
2001. 39 million U.S. citizens. If I add those together, I'm
coming up with about the number of people that voted in the
November 2004 presidential election.
Already, we have the Senate passing a proposal to delay the
requirement of proof of U.S. citizenship to January of 2009,
based on the obvious problem of either being able to issue U.S.
passports or even an alternative form of document that is being
proposed that's like an electronic passport. So we have issues
in being able, even through the federal government, of doing
this job.
And also some other examples, U.S. VISIT. U.S. VISIT is
supposed to be tracking entry and exit into our country. And as
it stands right now, we have yet to be able to implement exit
control. Anybody along the border will tell you that we don't
even have facilities to enable one to inspect vehicles
departing the United States to confirm whether or not someone
has actually departed.
And in addition, are we going to have people that are going
to get out of cars and present themselves? I can assure you
that in El Paso, Texas, as well as in Las Cruces, that you are
not going to have the ability to get commerce back and forth if
that particular provision is implemented.
So what's happened, logic has indeed prevailed to some
degree, and we have postponed the full implementation of what
originated as Section 110, IIRAIRA, because of the practical
impossibility.
What we want is not optical security issues. What we want,
in a voter registration perspective, are not optical placebos.
I think that the idea of identity verification is one you have
to cautiously balance against the concern of voter suppression,
and make sure that you think of the poor or the disabled and
those unable to have access or means to be able to provide
documentation of just status, period, without talking about
citizenship.
Let's have a further example in the employment verification
context. Employers having to document whether or not someone is
legally eligible to work, one factor, and then, in addition to
that, their identity. There are list, A, B and C documents. In
the testimony provided--
He has gotten the gavel.
In the testimony provided, you will see that there is an
example of the I-9 form, which for U.S. citizenship purposes,
you can prove citizenship by a U.S. passport, certificate of
citizenship, or a certificate of naturalization. To obtain a
certificate of citizenship right now costs over $200 and months
to process.
So what I'm trying to invoke here is that it's quite
difficult to be able to impose that requirement from a
documentation perspective.
And in brief summary, I also want to make sure that you are
aware, if someone is a non-citizen and they vote, there are
extremely severe consequences in U.S. immigration law to that
action. There are two provisions of law that everyone should
know about. Title 18, Section 1015, which makes it a felony,
punishable by a fine of up to five years of imprisonment, if
you claim U.S. citizenship falsely as your basis to vote in any
federal, state or local election.
In addition to that, in Section 611, if I vote in a federal
election, that is a criminal action, punishable by a fine or up
to one year imprisonment or both; and in addition, from an
immigration perspective, if I do so, I'm subject to removal
from the United States; and in addition to that,inadmissibility
to the United States.
So I would try to conjecture here that anyone in their
right mind, who wishes to guard their right to live and work in
the United States, would never hesitate to cross--excuse me--
would never cross that line to vote knowing these consequences.
What I would suggest is that if we have a voter education
campaign of trying to provide those who register individuals to
vote with information about the consequences to a non-citizen
if they do, then this concern would be resolved.
Thank you, sir. I see I'm out of time.
The Chairman. Thank you.
[The statement of Ms. Walker follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.099
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.100
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.101
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.102
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.103
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.104
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.105
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.106
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.107
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.108
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.109
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.110
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.111
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.112
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.113
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.114
The Chairman. But I'm sure that as we ask questions, you
will have time to express more of your thoughts. I'm going to
get back to you on that.
Ms. Walker. Thank you.
The Chairman. Mr. Yazzi.
STATEMENT OF KIMMETH YAZZI, REPRESENTATIVE, NAVAJO NATION
Mr. Yazzi. Good afternoon. Thank you for letting me testify
before this hearing.
First of all, Native Americans, they have been here for a
while. We've been here for a while. And--but it wasn't until
1924 that we were granted citizenship by the United States. And
then, in 1948, we were granted the right to vote, and we love
to vote. We love to vote--the voter turnout percentage for
Native Americans has always been high.
And earlier you mentioned something about swing vote. And I
believe Native Americans have made the deciding vote in some of
the local, state and federal elections.
There are 22 tribes in New Mexico. I'm here on behalf of
the Navajo people. The Navajo Reservation extends into six
counties up in the northwestern area. And that's who I'm
testifying for.
We are talking about immigration issues here, and we are
talking, I believe, some about the boundary issues, too. And we
have a lot of boundary issues with our nation as well. We have
Mexico to the south, we have Texas to the east, Oklahoma to the
east, Colorado to the north, Utah, Arizona. Our nation is
surrounded by boundaries, and we have a lot of concerns with
these boundaries as well, as Native Americans.
As far as IDs, our tribe, there's only a few people, a
few--maybe a little over half that have IDs, pictorial IDs. We
have tribal identifications, but they're not--they don't have
pictures on them. They only have limited information on them,
like tribal census numbers, what day we were born, where we
were born. Sometimes it has the tribes that we were born into.
The Navajo Nation is generally a rural area. We do not have
streets. We do not have addresses where the residential
addresses can be identified by numbers or streets. We live in
rural areas. Our rural--our addresses are identified by
physical boundaries, physical locations, chapter houses,
highways, intersections, so many miles from here, so many miles
from there. And sometimes they laugh about us. They say,
``Indians live in post office boxes.'' That's mainly what our
addresses are.
But one thing that we have for sure is, we have the right
to vote. As Native Americans, we love that right. As a matter
of fact, I'm sitting before you, I'm registered in two
locations. I'm registered for the Navajo Nation elections. We
elect our president, we elect our vice president, our Navajo
Nation Council, school board, land board, farm board, all these
people that represent us in the tribal government. But I also
am a registered member of the United States government. So I
also vote for the United States president, the senators, the
congressmen. So we kind of feel like we are two people, because
we can vote in two places.
And then this voter identification issue has--it's going to
limit our nation because of some of the stats that I'm going to
give you, okay.
Thirty-three percent of our Navajo people, we don't have
plumbing. Sixty-two percent do not have telephones. Twenty
percent do not have access to vehicles. Fifty-six percent of
our Navajo people do not have modern heating. We have to chop
woods and bring it up and build a fire in the stove. That
doesn't mean that we want all these modern things. I think we
are satisfied with what we have.
But this is where voter identification--we don't--a lot of
the Navajos, they don't--they don't have bills that they are
sent to. They don't have electric--telephone bills. They don't
have electricity bills. They don't have heating bills. And if a
telephone bill goes to a location, to an individual's house,
there might be five, six people living in that household, and
the bills only go to one individual.
So, in Arizona, we are dealing with Proposition 200, and
those are some of the issues that come up there, where they
want us to present two bills, like a telephone or a utility
bill. But because only one individual in the household receives
the bills, other people cannot use the same ones.
One thing that I think about personally, when the subject
of immigration comes up, the subject of illegal voting comes
up, illegal voter registration, and just like the other
industries, like the liquor industry or the cigarette industry,
we should go after the administrators, the people that
provide--the top people instead of the voters, instead of the
consumers.
And for voter registration, that's what I feel, we should--
we should--the county clerks, the county officials, the state
officials, those are the people that should make it easier for
people to vote. We shouldn't have to put the burden on the
voters at the grass root--grass root level to provide identity
so they can vote. So that's one of the things that I just
wanted to say.
But we're willing to work with whomever on these issues.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.115
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.116
The Chairman. Ms. Hensley.
STATEMENT OF JENNIFER HENSLEY, LEGAL RIGHTS ADVOCATE, NEW
MEXICO PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY
Ms. Hensley. Good morning. Thank you for allowing me to
testify.
My name is Jennifer Hensley. I'm a legal rights advocate
for New Mexico Protection and Advocacy. New Mexico Protection
and Advocacy, it was founded in New Mexico in 1979. We are a
private non-profit agency that works with--to expand, promote
and protect the legal rights of individuals with disabilities.
My testimony this morning is based on our 26 years of
working with thousands of individuals with disabilities and
most recently, over the last few years, after the Help America
Vote Act. We believe that people with disabilities will be
greatly impacted by having to prove citizenship and by having
to provide photo ID.
Many people with disabilities have lived in residential
placements and do not have access to those type of documents.
They may not have obtained them from a family member or may not
know how to go about getting those documents.
A passport costs about $100, and you must figure out how to
navigate the system, and it takes a while to apply for those
and to receive those.
A photo ID costs $10--a birth certificate costs $10 in New
Mexico. However, if you weren't born in New Mexico, you have to
apply in another state and pay those fees, and you have to
figure out how to navigate that system, which many people with
disabilities can't do that.
We receive funding from the Administration on Developmental
Disabilities under the Department of Health to promote people
with disabilities participating in the electoral--in the
electoral process. We encourage Congress to remember that
people with disabilities already face barriers to voting, such
as inaccessible polling places, inaccessible voting machines,
lack of access to transportation. We believe that these
provisions would cause significant hardships to individuals
that live on fixed incomes.
We also believe that imposing such a process that requires
people to pay a fee to vote is tantamount to a poll tax, which
our American--our modern society has rejected.
We also encourage the committee to remember that not all
people live like congressmen--congress people and our friends
or our neighbors; that while some of us may have driver's
licenses and a few may have passports, lack of those documents
should not--should not prevent people from being able to vote.
All Americans have the right to vote and want to do so. We
encourage the Congress to not put barriers, to remove the
barriers.
Again, please remember that all Americans have the right to
vote, regardless of the circumstances that they live in, and
imposing such a process will leave these people behind and
again create barriers.
Again, thank you for allowing me to testify this morning.
And welcome to Las Cruces.
The Chairman. Thank you very much for your testimony.
[The statement of Ms. Hensley follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.117
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.118
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.119
The Chairman. And I certainly agree with your concerns
about anyone with any disability being able to vote, and that's
why in the Help America Vote Act, we specifically made
provision that every state and every locality has to provide
access for anyone with any disability. That doesn't solve all
the problems, but it solves part of them.
Thank you all for your testimony. It was excellent. And I
really appreciate it. It gave me some new insight into it.
I have one question, just a quick question right off. Ms.
Walker, you referred to this and also Ms. Hensley, the
difficulty of getting a photo ID or the expense. In Michigan--
and I thought most states did this now--you can get a photo ID
from the Secretary of State, even if you don't get a driver's
license. You just go down there and get it. I'm not even sure
there is a fee. For a while there was a $1 fee. I'm not sure
it's anything now.
Do they have anything equivalent to that in New Mexico,
that you just go down to the driver's license agency and get
your picture taken and get a photo ID?
Ms. Hensley. You must pay for it.
The Chairman. Yes, Ms. Walker.
Ms. Walker. I'm sorry. If I may.
From the--from the perspective of getting a photo ID, I
wonder how you are dealing with the issue of fraud, becauseif
you go and just get a photograph and put Jane Doe's name next to that
photograph, how does that establish that Jane Doe is indeed the person
in that picture. I just don't really see--if we are dealing with the
fundamental issue of establishing identity, that doesn't cut it.
And in addition to that, in the--let's take the laser visa,
border crossing card perspective in immigration. That's what we
have--a vast majority of Mexican nationals coming across to
visit family, shop, have in order to enter the United States.
But if there's a problem--and they try to secure the document
by tying a fingerprint to that card. And at least that's what
you have with that laser visa.
Unfortunately, Congress has not seen fit nor has industry
seemed to be able to accomplish utilizing the biometrics
scanning capacity of that card. But it was a good effort.
So what I'm concerned about for the disabled, just making
it down to the store to even get the photo ID is a big deal.
And somehow, someone has to think it all through.
The Chairman. I recognize that.
Ms. Walker. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And I'm sure there are ways to deal with
that, too. We do it in Michigan.
I want to ask some things specific to New Mexico. There is
some litigation that occurred here before the 2004 election. It
required first-time voters who registered by mail to produce
some sort of ID before voting. The intent was to ensure
registrants who did not register in person with an election
official would have to produce some ID before voting.
The Secretary of State, as I understand it, interpreted
this to not apply to first-time registrants whose registration
forms were hand-delivered instead of being mailed. So for those
527 groups that were doing these registration drives--and you
have testified, I believe. Ms. Perea singled out that as one of
the problems--if they mailed the forms in, an ID would have
been required. If they hand-delivered them, no ID required. And
a court has sustained the approach.
Is that policy still in effect at this time, or has this
been resolved? I just want to get up to date on this issue.
Perhaps, Mr. Bryant, since you are an attorney, maybe you
can clarify that.
Mr. Bryant. Mr. Chairman, the issue stands exactly as you
framed it today, just like it was in 2004. And some form of ID
was required for mail-in but not for walk-in registrations. In
fact, it got to the point where one or more individuals could
bring in stacks of several hundred registrations all at once,
and because they were hand-delivered, they were simply dropped
on the counter and into the clerk's office they went for
processing.
The Chairman. Any other comments on that? Anyone else.
Mr. Bryant. Can I address the photo ID and DMV issue for
just a moment.
The Chairman. Yes, you may.
Mr. Bryant. There is a process in New Mexico for obtaining
a photo ID through the local DMV offices. Historically, it was
quite a problem, but in more recent years, the department has
opened storefront locations, desk-type or kiosk-type locations
in shopping areas. There is an identification requirement and a
proof-of-age requirement in the statute for that photo ID,
because if you are under 21 in New Mexico, your photo is taken
on a profile and that way somebody who serves alcohol knows
immediately, by seeing a profile photograph, that you are not
old enough to buy alcohol, and then full-face photos for people
over 21.
And so certain aspects of Ms. Walker's concerns about
verifying the ID are, in fact, addressed in the process.
Although I'm not trying to assert that it's perfect or that it
is easy enough so that every single person can do that. It has
been streamlined, and the system has been improved
dramatically, especially in the last several years.
The Chairman. Is there a charge for those?
Mr. Bryant. There is a small fee in New Mexico for those
photo IDs, yes, sir.
Ms. Perea. May I----
The Chairman. Ms. Perea.
Ms. Perea. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Addressing that issue specifically to the municipality of
Albuquerque, in the last election, there was a requirement for
a photo ID, and that was provided for free to anybody that
didn't have one.
The Chairman. Okay. Thank you very much. My time has
expired.
I am pleased to recognize Ms. Lofgren from California.
Ms. Lofgren. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This has been interesting. And I guess we all bring our own
personal experiences to whatever we do. And I've been in
Congress now for 11 and a half years, but before that I was on
the Board of Supervisors in Santa Clara County, which runs all
the elections.
And listening to your testimony, particularly Ms. Perea, it
occurs to me that obviously we need to protect the right to
vote. But we are here in a hospital, actually. The first thing
the doctors know is that first you do no harm. That's the
mission.
And it sounds to me that there is a need for purging of the
rolls of dead wood. And that's something that when I was in
local government, we did periodically because people die, they
move, and you had positive. And so you certainly don't want to
put a photo ID requirement that will disenfranchise 400,000
Navajo Americans, when the county government could just purge
the rolls. I mean, you want to make sure that first we do no
harm.
I'll just give a suggestion, for what it's worth, as well,
in California, the election officials--not that we're so
perfect. But there, it's completely non-party--it's more than
non-partisan, it's civil service. All the election officials
are not--I mean, they're not--most of them are voter registered
``decline to state'' because they don't want any suspicion. But
for example, the registrar on voters in our county is a civil
servant. And so the elected officials and the parties have
absolutely nothing to do with it.
And I think there's never been an instance such as you've
described where, you know, people grab the ballot boxes with
bolt cutters. And I would note that a photo ID would not have
anything to do with the bolt cutters.
I just want suggest that for people to think about later,
my comment here today, because it served us, I think, pretty
well.
I would like to follow up, Ms. Walker, because your time
ran out. And it's something, before I was in county government,
I was an immigration lawyer and I used to teach immigration
law. And my experience in that is--is and really as a member of
the Immigration Subcommittee and the JudiciaryCommittee, is
that people who come here illegally primarily come here to get a job, I
mean, for money. They don't--they're not sneaking across the border to
vote. I mean, they're sneaking across the border for money.
[Applause.]
Ms. Lofgren. There will be no clapping allowed.
And for people--it's very tough to get your legal permanent
residence. There's a lot of paperwork and time involved and the
like.
And at least, in my experience, you would never jeopardize
the years it would take to get your legal permanent residence,
I mean, to vote. I mean, if you knew that you could be
deported, permanently barred from the United States, and also
could serve five years in prison, you wouldn't want to do that
to vote.
Can you address the legal issues relative--I mean, has that
been in your experience, or am I just unique in that?
Ms. Walker. The only way I can think of a legal permanent
resident, who in some cases has waited more than 15 years to
acquire that status, depending upon what country or nationality
and visa availability, no one, after waiting that long, is
hoping to be forced to return to their home country. And I
think there is a fundamental problem, even within the U.S.
public, of thinking that citizenship is somehow the same as
legal permanent residence and legal permanent residents being
given documentation, to say, ``Go ahead and--you know, here's
the voting information.'' And people do not appreciate that
you're basically handing them a death warrant when you give
that general pleasant information to them.
So I think an educational memoranda could be easily
provided at time of voter registration to try to allay that
problem.
Ms. Lofgren. I'd like to just follow up with Mr. Yazzi.
Your description of your home was something. Some day I would
like to visit. I mean, I've never really been to such a place.
It sounds so remote and so rural.
I'm thinking, as we talked about, you know, marching down
to the DMV to get a photo ID, how feasible would that be from
your home in Navajo land?
Mr. Yazzi. Thank you for your question.
The border towns that surround the reservations are quite a
distance away. I'm lucky, I live like 15 minutes from Gallup,
New Mexico. But we have remote locations that are maybe 100,
150 miles from the nearest--the nearest town, such as
Farmington or Gallup or, in Arizona, like Flagstaff. It takes
quite an undertaking.
And then, with all the requirements, which is why we
don't--a lot of our Navajos do not--some of them have never
even driven vehicles. Our elderly people have never had IDs.
And it's not--you know, a lot of people may think that we
probably need it. But when you talk to our elderly people, when
you talk to the rural Navajos, they're satisfied with where
they're at. They're satisfied with the way they live.
And voting, in the Navajo Nation, we treat it like a
celebration. We changed our Navajo Nation general election to
coincide with the national election, and our tribe gives our
employees the day off to go vote. And they treat it like a--
they treat it like a holiday. That's where people gather to
talk. They campaign. We do--you don't see anyone slinging over
there. You see all these food camps where people go to eat.
They catch up on their lives from last year or whatever. But it
is treated like a celebration.
And--but the ideas of the IDs, I don't think a lot of our
Navajos, they're not used to that.
As a matter of fact, I was just--I e-mailed one of your
staff members. Native Americans believe--generally believe that
if you take a picture of somebody, you take their soul and
their spirit. You take that away from them, part of it. That's
why they don't like to take pictures as well.
The Chairman. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
Mr. Pearce.
Mr. Pearce. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Just a quick comment on Mr. Yazzi's last statement about
the belief that taking a picture of someone takes their soul
and spirit away. Hollywood gives a great credence to that very
thing. Probably no group is more photographed than Hollywood.
Ms. Hensley, I appreciate your advocacy for the
handicapped. We--my brother is handicapped and actually sits on
the Nationwide Handicap Access Board. So it's an issue that I'm
very engaged in and have national hearings on access into
national parks.
If--and you present some credible objections here, but they
all appear to be solvable. If we cure the problem of the cost,
if we cure the problem of navigating--and keep in mind, we just
signed up 27 million people nationwide, or more, in a very
complex Medicare plan. And so we have shown the ability to work
complex things through very large groups of people.
If we solve those problems, would you find objection then
to photo ID for--and the way it would affect the handicapped?
Ms. Hensley. The main thing--we're talking about access.
Mr. Pearce. Talking about the ID.
Ms. Hensley. If we solve those problems, possibly.
Mr. Pearce. Because we're here--in Washington, we get a
sense across the board and we may disenfranchise a few.
Ms. Perea had a stunning presentation on the documentation
of the fraud and the articles in the last election. New Mexico
did not certify the election for 23 days after the election was
over. People from New Mexico were calling me every day. This is
a public and national embarrassment for our state.
I personally know, because I was writing down my figures as
well as President Bush's, on election day, he was ahead by
31,000. That margin dropped by 26,000 votes, down to 5,000.
In your view, Ms. Perea, would you think that the
provisional votes were falling that much in favor of Mr. Kerry?
Do you think that there were problems in those 23 days that we
failed to certify.
Ms. Perea. Mr. Chairman and Representative Pearce, I just--
I just feel we had so many problems across the board on how we
were receiving those votes and certainly on the provisional
ballots, that we didn't have the clear instructions. And not
having consistent instructions throughout the 33 counties
within the state of New Mexico caused an even greater problem.
Mr. Pearce. Thank you.
Now, Mr. Bryant, in my opening statement, I talked about
the county clerk from this county who was indicted and
eventually convicted of voter violations. Was the state
secretary--the Secretary of State or the director ofelections
involved in the bringing forth of that case.
Mr. Bryant. No, sir. It was--that was handled locally by
the district attorney's office in Dona Ana County.
Mr. Pearce. And when invited, did the Secretary of State
and Elections Bureau ever become involved.
Mr. Bryant. No, sir. They did not.
Mr. Pearce. Mr. Chairman, these are things that I know
personally and I bring up--and I appreciate you coming to this
particular location, because Ms. Perea's testimony and Mr.
Bryant's testimony and Ms. Justine Fox's testimony all tell us
the same thing.
Mr. Bryant, one of the ways here in this state that an
election fraud occurs is that on election day, you have your
poll worker signing people in like--say, at a table like this.
And sometimes someone would come in and look over the shoulder
and find a blank line, and magically, that person's the next
one at the door. It just works over and over in that way. And
it was against the law. And so people began to bring up the
fact that this is occurring.
Now, in the last--in two legislative sessions ago, I think
the legislature changed the law to where it is now legal to
come in the door, look over the shoulder and see blank lines.
Is that a piece of legislation that was passed by the state
legislature and signed by the governor?
Mr. Bryant. Yes, sir. It is legal.
Mr. Pearce. It is legal now for a worker to come in, look
over the shoulder, find blank lines, and then, without any
identification, we have potential problems existing.
Mr. Bryant. And what they are supposed to be doing is
looking for their name in the roster. But you can see that for
the voter that intends to commit fraud, it's a wide-open door.
And isn't it incredible that things--something as simple as
a photo ID would absolutely slam the door on 100 percent of
that.
Mr. Pearce. Now, how many voters--how many voters would not
know that they had already voted.
Ms. Justine Fox, were you there when that--that bill was
passed? What was the conversation that--how many voters were
documented in the hearings at the state legislature of people
who didn't know they had voted on that particular day? It's
just stunning.
Ms. Fox-Young. Mr. Chairman.
As is typical, there were no voters who weren't aware that
they voted.
Mr. Pearce. Okay.
Ms. Fox-Young. But that's a conversation we often have in
Santa Fe.
Mr. Pearce. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I know my time's about
gone. I'll have a second round, if we have them.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
First of all, I would like to pick up on a comment that was
made by my colleague from California. I don't think anyone
believes that illegal immigrants come here to vote, and I
suspect that very few of them would even attempt to vote
illegally if they knew the penalties.
My concern, and what is emerging to me from this hearing is
not the individuals who do things like that but organizations
that are trying in some way or another to subvert an election.
That, incidentally, is my experience across the country in
various places where I have been. It's usually not individuals
doing something. Although, there was the case of the gentleman
in Tennessee who registered his dog and always voted once for
himself and once for his dog. They knew about it and they
tolerated it. But when he proceeded to register himself and his
dog in three different precincts, that was a bit too much, and
so he got in trouble.
But by and large, it's organized efforts that I'm concerned
about. We have Tammany Hall, we have the Pendergrast Machine,
et cetera. That's the issue.
And my concern, in relationship to the illegal immigrants,
is that organizations may be using them in a way that could
really endanger their status in this country. And so if
organizations are, in fact, deliberately looking for people to
vote and deliberately or inadvertently registering illegal
immigrants, they're really endangering these folks by having
them vote.
So I think that's something we have to bear in mind as we
try to straighten this out.
Relating again, to the state and the federal government,
Representative Fox-Young, you referenced the federal databases
that exist that have information on immigrant status. But you
also indicated that local election officials have trouble
accessing this information.
And I wanted to ask Mr. Bryant, since you have a great deal
of experience at the county level, are they experiencing that
problem as well, that they are not able to get the information
from the federal government that would help them identify who
was legally allowed to vote and who was not?
Mr. Bryant. Yes, sir, they are. But in addition to that,
the way the system is set up here in New Mexico, they are, in
effect, prohibited from being able to go beyond the voter's
assertion that that's me on the voter roll, as I look at the
blank line and offer to vote.
The way the system is designed here, each party can have a
watcher and challenger at the polling place who can say, ``I
challenge that voter.'' When they do that, the precinct
officials still don't get to ask for a photo ID, but they get
together and they vote amongst themselves, the precinct
officials, ``Do we let this person vote or do we not?'' If the
person is, yes, that person votes and the matter is over, and
there is no way to review that. If they say no, then the person
is allowed to vote on a paper ballot, and that ballot is put in
the ballot box for handling during the canvass.
We have a statement from a watcher in a precinct down in
Anthony, New Mexico, in the 2004 election, using this process:
He saw a van pull up out in front of a polling place, and a
number of people climbed out of the van. He went around, and he
looked at the license plate on the van, and it was Chihuahua,
Mexico. And a bunch of individuals jumped out of the van, and
they went in the polling place, they found their blank lines
and they voted. And there was no effective way for him to do
his job. Again, a simple photo ID would have stopped all of
that from occurring.
It's an incredibly simple first step in the process of
trying to get some confidence and some vitality, especially
here in New Mexico.
The Chairman. Representative Fox-Young, do you have a
comment?
Ms. Fox-Young. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
If you back up a moment into the registration process and
look at those databases and how they might be relevant there,
you have the same problem. The burden lies on thevoter
throughout the registration process in New Mexico.
But we have databases here that could be useful. We have
Homeland Security has--and ICE have databases of folks who have
overstayed their time in the country. New Mexico Motor Vehicle
Department has databases of individuals who have applied for
and brought in documents to obtain driver's licenses. But there
is no mechanism for our election officials to use those and to
verify.
And I think your point that we are looking at a huge
problem with the incentives that 527s have to generate, you
know, higher and higher registration numbers and get folks to
polls, a very vulnerable population, and there is no check. We
have the means to do it, but we have no statutory authority to
do it.
The Chairman. One last question. The Real ID Act, which
Congress passed, which would solve much of the ID problem, we
hope. But it goes into effect in 2008 and will impose new
requirements of those seeking ID.
Has New Mexico begun to implement this law?
Ms. Fox-Young. Mr. Chairman, if I may.
New Mexico has begun to discuss it. Certainly, in interim
committee meetings this summer, we already are. The Revenue
Stabilization Tax Committee discussed it last week, in fact,
and has started to put--put things into place. But there has
been no substantive movement that I know of, in terms of
implementing it.
The Chairman. All right. Thank you. My time has expired.
I'm pleased to recognize the gentlewoman from California,
Ms. Lofgren.
And I'll hand the gavel to you.
Ms. Lofgren. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I--listening to this, and we had actually tried to get a
representative from AARP, but our logistics didn't work. But at
our last hearing, this is what the AARP said to the House
Administration Committee.
They said, ``New state laws in implementing rules will
significantly limit opportunities to register and/or vote. Many
persons who are qualified to vote but do not have ready access
to documents, such birth certificates, driver's licenses and
passports, that have never been deemed necessary in the past,
may lose the fundamental right to vote.''
And as I looked into this whole ID testimony about photo
IDs, I think there is an assumption that sometimes--and we need
to guard against, that everybody is in the same situation as I
am, and it's not the case. I think about my dad, who was a
truck driver, he never had a passport, and actually less than
20 percent of Americans have passports.
Or I think about nursing home residents. I mean, in the
study in Wisconsin, 5 percent or less of nursing home residents
had a photo ID. And obviously, if you're in a nursing home, you
can't go down to the DMV and get even a free photo ID.
So I think we need to--and my colleague, Mr. Pearce,
mentioned the Medicaid situation. And I think actually that's
instructive, because we put in the Budget Deficit Reduction Act
a proof of citizenship requirement to receive Medicaid. And
what we found out, in the hospitals and the nursing homes and
the like, basically said there are individuals who are
Americans who can't--they can't prove it, but they are
Americans. They've worked there all their lives. They've paid
their taxes. And now they're in a nursing home. Some of the
examples of people who are very elderly, who--they were born at
home and didn't have a birth certificate, or they had moved
many times and they couldn't--they didn't have their documents
with them. And yet, you know, they are the Americans, and you
can't.
And if you can't produce a document to save your life,
which is basically what we are talking about for Medicaid, I
think, you know, certainly that's a more important thing to
most Americans than voting. As precious as voting is, living is
even more precious than voting.
So I think the fact that we had to actually relieve that
requirement for the Medicaid system is quite instructive.
You know, I wanted to talk to you, Ms. Hensley, on some of
the issues faced by the disabled community. And obviously, if
you don't see, you don't have a driver's license. If--mobility
may not be impaired but it's certainly more difficult if you
can't pop in your car.
So even if there were a reduction in fees or the like,
how--speaking for yourself and also for others who--who are
disabled, how easy would it be to go and get these ID cards?
Ms. Hensley. Not easy at all. As you say, most people have
driver's licenses but not everybody. And just access, the fact
of getting down there for people with disabilities. And in New
Mexico, we have a very rural community, where 90 percent of
people with disabilities don't have access to transportation.
And so it would be very difficult and add another barrier
amongst all the other ones that we face regularly.
Ms. Lofgren. Someone said--I don't remember who--that a
large percentage of voters approve these photo ID items.
But I always carry a copy of the U.S. Constitution with me
on my person, and when things get slow, I read through it. And
the Fourteenth Amendment is really an important one, because it
says that no state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United
States or which shall deprive any person of life, liberty or
property without due process of law and/or deny to any person
within its jurisdiction equal protection of the laws. And of
course, Article Fifteen provides the rights of citizens of the
United States shall not be denied or abridged.
Now, it seems to me--and I would appreciate comment from
any of the members--that if those who cannot produce proof of
citizenship are disproportionately poor, rural, elderly or
disabled, and there are other remedies, for example,
challenging and having provisional ballots if one suspects
fraud, purging the rolls, how could this voter ID measure meet
the requirements?
Before--maybe I should direct that to the two lawyers on
the panel.
Ms. Walker. If I may, in the lawsuit that is currently
pending regarding Proposition 200, that indeed is one of the
arguments of the ACLU and others bringing that action. And
fundamentally, I think you--it is the phrase, You're using a
bazooka to deal with something versus the appropriate measure
that might actually deal with remedying the situation. I don't
see how you can avoid violating the Fourteenth Amendment in
those circumstances.
Ms. Lofgren. Mr. Bryant, you may disagree.
Mr. Bryant. If we have two lawyers on the panel, there is
liable to be a disagreement.
My approach is actually quite the opposite, Representative
Lofgren. What we have in New Mexico is, wehave an existing
abridgement of the right to vote for a vast number of voters here by
the current statutory scheme that exists and the lack of ability to
guarantee that we know that the voter who is voting is the voter that
is supposed to be voting.
I've got a letter from Lois Hart with me today about her
mother who is elderly and disabled. The last time her mother
was able to vote was in 1996, and she voted absentee because of
her health. Since then, she's been too ill to vote. But the
poll books in Dona Ana County reflect that Vada Hart has voted
in a number of elections since then. And Lois knows it's not
her mother. She cares for her at home. And Lois writes, ``This
can only mean that someone is stealing her name and casting her
vote.''
And we have allowed a system to develop, a problem to exist
that is abridging Vada Hart's right to vote, it's stealing her
right to vote, and it's criminally negligent in New Mexico to
continue to do that.
Ms. Lofgren. If I may, Mr. Bryant, the issue--the question
really is whether this lady--and obviously, it's an important
issue that she raises--whether the remedy is to disenfranchise
450,000 Navajos that Mr. Yazzi is here to represent.
Mr. Bryant. And if that were really the result, I would
give you a resounding no. But it isn't the result, and it
doesn't have to be the result.
What we have to do is, we have to balance the interests of
the integrity of the electoral process here in New Mexico with
the interest of Mr. Yazzi and the Navajos, New Mexico's
Hispanics, our--our entire population.
In the salute to our flag, we call ourselves United
Cultures, and we indeed are here.
And I believe absolutely that we can put in place a
legitimate, viable voter ID program that includes a photograph
so that when I go to the poll, they know it's Dan Bryant that
is offering to vote, and do that in a way that does not
infringe on our Navajos.
Ms. Lofgren. I'm about to run out of time. But I'll just
say this: I think that we could do that in this circumstance.
If, as a matter of policy, the federal government fingerprints
every baby and every person in the United States. Goes out to
every corner of the country, fingerprints every Native
American, fingerprints every nursing home resident and makes
sure that there is no exception, that we have biometrics on
every person born and who has already resided in the U.S., then
you could do that positive ID.
But I don't--I don't see that that's what we are going to
do, number two. And I also don't think--I mean, I'm not
recommending it. But I don't hear from my constituents in
California that that's something they think is a good idea. I
mean, they feel that is intrusive, from a private point of
view. But there could be a nationwide debate on that point.
Because I--well, I guess my time is over, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for allowing me.
The Chairman. Thank you. There will be a third round, and
you can continue the speech.
Congressman Pearce.
Mr. Pearce. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Yazzi, I grew up in a very rural part of New Mexico and
am familiar with having to give directions to turn right at
this sign post, go five miles, and then I'm on the second or
third house on the right, depending on which way you count. And
so I'm very familiar.
But I am aware that the enhanced 911 system has established
streets and house numbers so that the place that I lived that
never had an actual street or number now has one, and so I
don't know if they've worked their way through your
neighborhood yet, but I suspect they are on the way. Because
what the idea is, is that we can GPS coordinate every 911 call
so that police can respond immediately, no matter where it is.
And that's a right of all Americans.
And so one of the problems that we face in registering and
identifying people that you mentioned as a problem would
certainly be well within solution.
Mr. Bryant, you heard the suggestion that one of the
beginning points is simply the purging of the rolls. Have you
been involved in any purging of rolls with counties, or are you
familiar with counties that have attempted to purge the rolls
here? Give us a little bit of an idea of what the circumstances
are when you purge the rolls here in this state.
Mr. Bryant. Historically, the purge program was run after
every biennial election, and it was based on voter activity at
the polls. With the adoption of HAVA, the ability of county
clerks in New Mexico to purge voter lists was significantly
altered and reduced. As a result of that, in terms of purging,
we are in significant trouble in New Mexico.
And I can share an example for you right here in Dona Ana
County. Mr. Walker, in doing some work for us, he went and took
a look at some of the areas here in the city of Las Cruces,
because we have lots of apartment complexes because we're a
college town. And so we took 19 apartment complexes and we
cross-referenced the voter registrations for those complexes.
Then we went to the complexes and we asked for lists of current
voters. Thirteen out of 19 complexes responded. And out of
those 13, we had a total of 1,000 registered voters. Six
hundred and sixty of them no longer lived at those addresses.
Now--and I heard the murmuring behind me. I was staggered
when Mr. Walker produced those numbers for me.
So the reason I keep saying photo voter ID is an important
first--a critical first step is because there are a number of
things that need to occur to create true integrity and
verifiability here in New Mexico. But I just believe that it is
a critical first step. There are other things that need to be
done and other pieces of the puzzle we need to fix.
Mr. Pearce. Thank you.
Ms. Perea, you had--you have by far the most documentation
in the hearing today.
Now, did I hear you say that you had complaints and you
have documentation from both Democrats and Republicans? In
other words, this is not a partisan issue, or is it a partisan
issue?
Ms. Perea. Mr. Chairman and Representative Pearce, it is by
no means a partisan. It's a citizen issue. It's a concern of
our governor. It's a concern of Senator Domenici. We have
quotes up and down on the various individuals that want to do
something about the problems that we have in New Mexico.
Mr. Pearce. So you basically find that all people,
regardless of registration, say, ``Just give us a fair
election, and we, as citizens, will live with the results.But
give us a fair election.'' Is that a fair summary of----
Ms. Perea. Fair, timely. The timeliness of our elections is
critical in the state of New Mexico. Making sure that we have
all the administrative checks and balances in place, yes.
Mr. Pearce. Okay. Ms. Walker, right at the end of the first
questioning by Mr. Ehlers, you had made a comment, something
about the education. I was being distracted at the moment and
did not get that fully.
Could you repeat, if you remember, what you were saying
about the way that we could combat this with education of our--
of the people who are coming into the country?
Ms. Walker. Well, I think it's not necessarily, well,
registration of just people coming into the country, but it's
when you look at a government official. If you come up to a
municipality or to a city, and the officer, after you
registered for selective service, gives you also a voter
registration card, and you're thinking, This must a good thing,
I'll go ahead and do it. There are few people that are aware of
these provisions in Title 18, who are here legally--legal
permanent residents, and don't recognize that this severe
consequence will obtain if they go ahead and send that card in,
just that simple act.
So I think providing that information at the time of
registration would help.
Mr. Pearce. Would be--you would declare that to be the
first significant step, that is, when they come into the
nation, just give them some information that this is a fairly
serious deal. All Americans take the right----
Ms. Walker. Right. And then, also, I think that you would
buttress that by educating voter registration organizations,
that when they are running out there to try to get the vote----
Mr. Pearce. You bet.
Ms. Walker [continuing]. That they provide that information
as well.
Mr. Pearce. And I appreciate that.
And again, I think it's the Chairman that mentioned--that
someone has mentioned that we are trying to balance all
concerns, because again we don't come into these things as a
partisan issue. Everybody is representing concerns from their
eyes and their viewpoint, and that's what the process is all
about.
And just in the last piece of my time, Mr. Chairman, I
don't know who would be best to answer, but what do you find,
as far as information presented to the people who are coming
into the country? Do they get any information, Mr. Bryant or
Ms. Perea, Justine Fox-Young, that helps them understand the
sanctity of this voting process? And do they get information at
the time they register?
Mr. Bryant. Representative Pearce, the answer to that is
no, and the answer is quite the opposite. In many instances,
they are encouraged by organizations to go ahead and register
to vote.
The point that I would make, with respect to that segment
of the issue is this: In New Mexico, because of the way the
process works, they are virtually guaranteed that if they do
vote, if they do register and they do vote, they will never get
caught, because there is absolutely no way for me to prove
after the fact that it was, in fact, that person who voted and
signed on that line at the poll that day. There's no mechanism
in place that would allow that to happen.
And so I don't see the penalties as ever being able to
effectively attach, at least not here in New Mexico.
Mr. Pearce. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As I yield back, I would just recommend that you listen
closely to Ms. Walker's suggestion. I think that it is a valid
one, and provision of information would certainly be a very
good step, also.
And just--we are all trying to work our way through a very
tight, thorny little issue, and it has a lot to do with the
confidence of American people in our system, and I think it's
well worth the effort.
But I yield back to you.
The Chairman. And I thank you.
We'll begin our third round of questions, and I'll follow
up basically on the same lines you raised in terms of giving
information.
Several of you have raised the issue about 527 groups
registering voters. I presume they are not the only ones
registering voters. At least in my home state, the Republicans
go out and try to register. The Democrats try to register. And
a particular candidate may want to increase the registration in
a certain area. There are some rules about educating those
people who are registering voters.
Are there rules governing that in this state? When you
complain about the 527 groups, are these groups actually
informing, as Ms. Walker said they should, making sure that
they register people who are citizens, or do they just take any
name they can get?
Do they have to undergo any training of any sort from the
local city clerk or county clerk? And are they allowed to be
paid based on the number of registrations they get?
Ms. Fox-Young.
Ms. Fox-Young. Sure. Mr. Chairman, we did make one
significant step in the last session in terms of regulating
527s, so to speak, or any--any registering agents. This state
used to function, I think, like a lot of states, where you had
deputy registrars who had to register--provide personal
information with the local authorities or the state before
doing so, and we had gotten away from that.
Now that we see so much soft money coming into all the
states, particularly the swing states, I think it is still true
that the parties engage in significant registration drives and
individual candidates do. But the bulk of registrations are
coming from the 527 groups because that's where the money is.
So we--we did pass a law in the last session requiring--as
part of this election reform bill, requiring 527 agents to
register with the Secretary of State. They do not need to
undergo any training. They do still pay their agents, and it is
still an unbiased process.
And I think as long as you have those incentives there and
as long as there are people who want to invest in swing states
and get the numbers up, you will continue to see these
problems. Although, I think we will be better off now that we
know who is doing particular registrations.
But if you look at, for instance, some of the registration
cards that I brought in, there is a line--and this was part of
the litigation that you brought up over first-time registrants
and the HAVA requirement. The court did uphold the Secretary of
State's interpretation of that law, as you said.
But anyway, through that litigation, it was impossible for
anybody to determine who had actually turned in aregistration
card. There was no paper trail back to a particular 527, back to the
party, back to the candidate, and now there is. And so there is a way,
if you want to pull all your cards, to go back now and check.
The Chairman. All right. Thank you.
Several of you have raised comments and concerns about a
photo ID, which is something that Mr. Bryant proposed, or some
other way of ensuring, as my colleague from California
mentioned, fingerprinting. And we are concerned about the
difficulty of access for certain groups, the difficulty of
getting it done, the cost. Some of you referred to a poll tax.
Let me ask, if either the state or federal government
provided that service at no cost, if they were able--willing to
go to the homes of those who could not get out or to the
reservations of those who didn't have means of transportation,
would you still have an objection to a photo ID?
Ms. Walker.
Ms. Walker. Just a very fervent comment.
The Chairman. Yes.
Ms. Walker. My background is in biometrics and border
security, and I've testified three times on the hill on those
issues.
And what bothers me the most, in trying to establish the
issue of identity in this concept, is that we have just
finished trashing the whole idea of using a card with a
simplistic photo on it to establish the identity of an
individual. The problem is, if it's a fraudulent card and has
somebody else's photo on it and I adopt the identity of Jane
Doe, it ties to that particular card at the moment.
So that's the reason why we went through the effort of
creating a laser visa document, to put the biometrics so that
the identity is tied to the body versus tied to a particular
photo.
I just wonder at the ability to decrease the current levels
of fraud regarding those individuals willing to go out there
and create their own documents, what the percentage is and what
this really will do regarding the reduction of that type of
fraud.
The Chairman. I'm not sure I quite understand. I understand
everything up to the last little bit.
Ms. Walker. I'm sorry. I get too wrapped up in this. I
apologize.
The Chairman. No, that's fine.
Ms. Walker. I need to get a life.
The Chairman. I think there are a number of other people
wrapped up in that.
Ms. Walker. But unwrapping myself from a biometrics role
print for a minute and the whole integration and host of
dilemmas right now facing the federal government. If I am
intending to commit voter fraud and I want to adopt the
identity of the dead person who is still on the rolls, I go get
the name and I have a photo ID made. Unless you have stringent
processes in place regarding verification of ID in some manner
before that document is created, then you've created what we
call it, as an optical solution. It looks good, but it doesn't
really achieve the objective. That's all.
The Chairman. Okay. When you talked about an ``optical
placebo,'' I assumed you meant that.
Ms. Walker. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Now, in Michigan, when we die, we want to be
buried in Chicago so we can continue our political involvement
after death.
It's the same problem. But there are ways of dealing with
it. The biometrics is one way, and there are various
biometrics. And I just met last week with a company that makes
a card that is very, very difficult to, in any way, reproduce
or to falsely identify someone.
So there are solutions, if we would do that.
Ms. Walker. Right.
The Chairman. And that is expensive.
Ms. Walker. Yes, sir. It's just how far up the chain you're
willing to go.
The Chairman. Yes. Right. But if we did that, then is your
objection removed?
Ms. Walker. If I have an actual card that deals with
identity documentation, then I don't have an objection that--
it's a good idea to be able to say Joe Blow is indeed Joe Blow.
But if I'm just creating a card that doesn't really have that
basis, then, no, it seems to be a wasted effort.
The Chairman. And that's part of the Real ID cards that I'm
not really satisfied in that legislation.
Would anyone else wish to comment on that? Mr. Yazzi.
Mr. Yazzi. Thank you for giving me time to comment.
As far as the voter ID, in Arizona, we are dealing with
Proposition 200, and that was initiated by the voters of
Arizona.
The Chairman. Right.
Mr. Yazzi. And our Navajo Nation is starting to feel the
drastic effects of Proposition 200 immediately, because if a
Navajo doesn't provide the proper voter identification, they
are going to get a provisional ballot, and they're going to be
asked to provide the proper ID within a certain amount of days.
And with the county offices being so far from the rural area of
the Navajo Nation, they are not going to want to go back to the
county offices within five days to provide the proper ID for
one vote.
That's where the issues that are on the ballot, the people
that are on the ballot that they voted for, their votes are not
going to count for that particular election. And we are talking
about November--September's Arizona primary. November's their
general election.
The Chairman. Right.
Mr. Yazzi. So, you know, it's going to have drastic effects
immediately.
And there is other ways that we have been suggesting, like
only--the only people that can vote is registered voters,
right? So why can't we provide voter identification when they
register instead of at the polls? See, those are some of the
suggestions that we have.
And one thing that I'm here to say is, whatever way this
goes, whichever avenue you take, we are willing to work with
people on this. We are willing to work with the counties, the
states, the federal. But we just need you guys to recognize
that Native Americans have an issue with this, with photo
identification.
The Chairman. And I totally agree with that. And my point
is simply that if we are serious about doing it, then we have
to face the fact that it is going to be expensive, because to
provide proper registration and identification procedures is
not cheap.
And I'm sure, Ms. Walker, you are aware of the cost of
that, too. I think we all have to recognize that.
In many cases, it's relatively easy. But part of what we're
going through is a result of the fact that over the past
quarter century and maybe half century, this country has become
exceedingly mobile, and we've ended up--most of us have ended
up living in larger cities.
There was no problem when I was a child. The town clerk
knew everyone in the town personally, and so they didn't need
ID. The world has changed.
And those who wish to use nefarious means to influence
elections are taking advantage of that and trying to work their
will. And I'm not throwing stones at anyone here, but it
happens. I've seen it happen.
And I've seen it happen in senior citizen homes, where
someone will go in with a sheet of absentee ballots and come
out with those absentee ballots completed and turn them in.
I mean, it's everywhere. So it's not as widespread as it
could be. But I certainly want to make sure we try to stop it
where we can.
I would also just want to notice, we will certainly,
whatever we do, try to avoid the poll tax issue. I don't think
that's a real problem.
Yes, Ms. Perea.
Ms. Perea. Mr. Chairman, on that point, as far as the cost
was concerned, I would just like to point out that in New
Mexico, because of the legislative action that we had last
year, there was a million dollars that was spent to give
identification cards to the voters of New Mexico, only to be
told that they didn't need them when they went to the polls
because they were incorrect and there were many errors.
And there had been the purging of the numbers of the voters
in 2005. But there was still 60,000 of those cards that were
out there that were not valid voter ID cards. And if I may,
this is a copy of those cards. And yet, we had the Secretary of
State go up on TV saying, ``Oh, don't worry about it if you
didn't get it, because you really don't need it to vote.''
And as long as we have those Band-Aid approaches, we
continue to spend a million dollars or more on things that are
not resolving the problem in the state of New Mexico.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
My time has more than expired.
Do you have a question?
Ms. Lofgren. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
I think there are a couple of--at least two issues about
the photo ID. One really is about the ID itself. And it's worth
noting that it's actually not that hard to get a photo ID, if
you want one. I mean, the 9/11 terrorists had 63 photo IDs. I
don't think they had them to vote, but I mean, they were able
to obtain them. The other issue is, what documents do you need
in order to get the photo ID?
In Mr. Hyde's legislation that actually was the subject of
the hearing on the hill provides for various--well, provides
for proof--positive proof of U.S. citizenship, which is not
necessarily always available even for people--especially for
people who are elderly.
So I guess the question about current IDs----
Let me ask you this: Representative Fox-Young, it sounds
like you have done some--in the legislature, some analysis and
study of this. One of the Wisconsin studies that I referenced
earlier, that is part of our record that was inserted from a
prior hearing, indicated that a small percentage of students
actually had a driver's license that had their current address
when they registered in college, as they are free to do, and
that a substantial number of married women--newly married women
had driver's licenses with their maiden names, not their
current names, and that, as I mentioned earlier, a very small
percentage of nursing home residents actually had driver's
licenses.
Did you--did the legislature look at what percentages of,
for example, students and married women? What the case is here
in New Mexico?
Ms. Fox-Young. Representative Lofgren, we--I can't tell you
offhand what the exact percentages are. I can tell you I have a
lot of difficulty with my name everywhere I go, and there are
many variations of it.
But we did look at issues surrounding Native Americans,
homeless, students, people whose names have changed, people who
have moved, and were able to work out--in the final bill, we
didn't pass all of those exemptions, and I don't think we
really got an ID bill out that had real teeth. You know, you
end up with ID; if not ID, then, you know, a written statement;
if not that, then an oral.
But we did look at those issues and we found ways around
all of them. I mean----
Ms. Lofgren. If I may, one of the witnesses that we had in
our last--he was just a fabulous--I mentioned him earlier, the
law professor at George Washington--made a point--and he has a
book actually out on it that I think is so important--which is
that we need to legislate based on statistics and analysis
rather than legislate on anecdotes.
And because--for every--there should be no voter fraud.
Nobody is for voter fraud. I mean, that's 100 percent, every
single person in this room.
But if you prevent one person from committing voter fraud,
but in doing so disadvantage 1,000 people from--who are
Americans from voting, then that's the wrong parameter. I mean,
that's why we need the statistical analysis.
Let me ask--I know we are supposed to be out of here at
11:00.
Getting to the other issue, which is the documentation to
get the ID, Mr. Yazzi, how many of the people in Navajo--the
Navajo Nation have birth certificates that they could provide
to--as an underlying document to get an ID that would comply
with Mr. Hyde's bill? Do you know that?
Mr. Yazzi. Thank you for your question.
Not right off, but we have--we have people that do not have
birth certificates. And I'm 45 years old. And even some people
in their 30s are born at home that don't have birth
certificates.
My first son, he's in the United States Navy, he was born
at home, and he was born in 1982. And we had a problem with not
getting his birth certificate because they wanted Arizona to
issue it and Arizona wanted New Mexico to issue it. He was born
in New Mexico. But we finally were able to get it, but we had a
problem getting it.
But there are a lot of people. My mom doesn't have a birth
certificate at all because she was born at home.
Ms. Lofgren. Thank you.
I--you know, although I think we have some disagreements on
the panel, this actually, I think, has produced some useful--a
useful piece of information that we might be able to do
something with, which is--has been referenced before,which is
about voter education.
And a lot of people may not realize--and this came out
actually in the California contest with Mr. Dornan. There were
seven people who had passed their citizenship test but had not
yet taken the oath. And they voted because they thought they
legally could, but they couldn't. They couldn't legally vote
because they hadn't yet taken the oath. So it wasn't an intent
to defraud, but it was an education problem.
If you are in the United States military, if you're in Iraq
but you're a legal permanent resident, you still can't vote.
And so we are going to reach out to our--our servicemen
fighting in Iraq so they can vote. But we need to make sure
that the servicemen who aren't yet citizens don't--don't vote.
So a lot of this is information--and I think we can all
agree that that kind of information would be a helpful thing,
in addition to the purging. I just note, again, from my--my
experience in local government what we did and still do.
And it saves the county money, actually. You would think it
wouldn't. We sent out postcards and--to the residents and--
periodically. And we do it three times. And if after three
times, they don't send it back, then we purge it. And we make
it up in postage, because then you get the people who've moved,
and it really--it works pretty well for us. So I'll just throw
it out for what it's worth.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to question.
The Chairman. Thank you for your comments.
As a former resident of California, I received those
communications. And I think California may be one of the few
states that does that. I personally found it extremely useful
to get those communications in the mail regarding what was to
be voted on and so forth. And every state, I would hope, would
aspire to do that.
Representative Pearce.
Mr. Pearce. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Again, appreciate the hearing and appreciate the
opportunity to be here and be a part of the panel.
This is not technically an immigration hearing, but there's
been enough things come up that I would like to--Mr. Chairman,
you are little bit closer to leadership than I am, a little bit
closer to the top of the heap than what I am as a second-
termer.
But if you would remind the House--my concerns with the
House passed a bill that caused my vote against it. I think, if
you would remind them that there were three things that were
problematic, one, holding employers accountable for
understanding and verifying the documents with which they hire
people, both Social Security or green cards or whatever. And we
understand the counterfeits that are available. And as an
employer, myself, I know that it is very difficult. That was
problematic.
The provision of making all illegal immigrants felons was a
very difficult provision, that actually Chairman Sensenbrenner
tried to amend out on the floor and had very few Democrat
supports. I'm not sure if they didn't understand that he was
trying to--he recognized he had made a mistake and tried to get
that out of the bill. We had visited with him as the bill went
to the floor, and so he was trying to get it out.
And finally, the issue of making people responsible--they
were trying to get the ``coyotes'' to be penalized and instead
stated it broadly enough that all people that helped illegals
would be criminals. And I've got members and people who live in
this district who want to follow the law very closely, but they
still tell me--they live on the border, and they tell me they
set water and food out because that's a human condition, and
the people coming across the desert often just have been there
for days, sometimes dragging kids.
And those three provisions, if you move forward, I would
appreciate, if we do anything on immigration, if you would
remind the leadership about those.
The--I've got a brief thing here, again, to express my
concern. I've got a breakdown of the elections of 2004 in this
county. It's not districtwide or it's not statewide. But in
this county, 922 votes were cast above the number of certified
signatures.
On election day, it was a very close vote in this county,
with the Democrat lead being at 4.8 percent of the early vote.
It swung a little bit on election day, increased to 8 percent.
But when we look at the absentee and provisional ballots, 27
percent of absentee and 37 percent of the provisionals came
out. So fully, the differential between that and election day
was very dramatic.
Again, if you looked at other voting patterns on that
election day, if you looked at the nine propositions, actually
the vote was very close. If you didn't find the absentee
provisional ballots to swing that hard one way or the other.
On election day, for the President--the President--
President Bush actually was a little bit ahead in the early
vote by 44 votes. He was a little behind on election day by
404. But when the absentees were counted up, President Bush
lost 2,043 votes here, in the absentee. Again, the
differentials--the spread on election day with the present
voting and the early vote was very, very nominal. But we see a
27.5 percent spread on the absentees.
Same thing happened on my election. I was ahead by 1741
votes on election day and with the early vote. But then, when
we talked about the absentees, I actually--that 1700-vote
spread was pulled down to only 1600--or only to 67 votes.
And again, you just have to--you have to see problems in
the solution.
Mr. Chairman, I want to compliment you on this panel. I
think that with the three of us up here and with this panel, I
believe that if it were up to us, we could sit down and craft a
bill to take us somewhat closer to the goal of fair and timely
elections.
I know that I could work with every single member. Ms.
Hensley and Mr. Yazzi both have good, compelling points that we
need to remember any time we're trying to make changes in the
system. Ms. Walker is objective and has presented good evidence
about the concerns that we literally face in creating IDs for
people.
And then Mr. Bryant, Ms. Perea and Representative Fox-Young
have all presented good information, saying that we probably
can do better. We should do better.
And so, from my perspective, from New Mexico, I appreciate
you coming into the Second District and having this hearing.
Because I believe if it were up to this panel here, the groups
at the two tables, we could come to a resolution.
Unfortunately, we have to get 218 votes, not three votes,
in the Congress. So it gets a little bit thornier aswe spread
it out across the country.
But I appreciate every single person's testimony today and
the balance they bring to the--to the hearing.
And with that, I would give back my time, Mr. Chairman.
Thanks again for being in the Second District of New Mexico.
The Chairman. Thank you. And it's been a real pleasure to
be here today. And you saved me some work by giving the thank
yous that I was going to give.
You've been a superb panel, very diverse but very
articulate, very capable and you really made your points well.
And that's extremely useful to us.
We have a series of hearings we're hoping to have on this
issue, to go to the different states and find out what the
problems are in various places.
I am just very delighted with the testimony and the
responses that we heard. I know there are a lot of people who
are here that are interested and haven't had a chance to speak.
If anyone has a pressing need to talk to me afterwards, I will
stick around for a little while and be happy to chat with you.
But our objective, as I said at the beginning, is to make
sure that every person in this nation who is legally entitled
to vote can vote without encumbrance, and at the same time,
make sure that their vote is not diluted by people or
organizations who are diluting the vote by having illegal votes
cast. So that is my objective, and I'm going to try to be as
fair as I can about it.
I certainly thank everyone here for their assistance. I
thank Ms. Lofgren for coming out from California for this. And
Representative Pearce was very helpful in organizing this
session.
Ms. Lofgren. Mr. Chair.
The Chairman. I have a little--yes?
Ms. Lofgren. I would like to ask unanimous consent to
submit several letters for the record, as well as the written
statements from the witnesses.
The Chairman. Fine. Thank you.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.120
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.121
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.122
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.123
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.124
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.125
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.126
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.127
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0169A.128
The Chairman. I've got a little bookkeeping here to do
before we close.
First of all, I want to thank again our distinguished
witnesses for their time, preparation and thoughtful comments.
And it does take time to prepare the thoughtful comments you
presented.
And I appreciate the staffs of the various representatives
for their work here and the additional work in setting up this
hearing.
I ask unanimous consent that members and witnesses have
seven calendar days to submit material for the record,
including additional questions of the witnesses, and for those
statements and materials to be entered into the appropriate
place in the record.
Without objection, the material will be so entered.
I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make
technical and conformity changes on all matters considered by
the committee at today's hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
My final comment, I agree with you in the three points you
raised about the immigration bill. And I'm hopeful that we
can--if we pass a bill, we can certainly take care of at least
those three points.
With that, once again, thank you very much. And the hearing
is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:14 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]