[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 21 (Wednesday, February 14, 2001)]
[House]
[Pages H351-H352]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            ELECTION REFORM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be here on the floor of 
the House this afternoon submitting this special order on election 
reform.
  Mr. Speaker, today I would like to address an issue that has been 
prominent in the minds of many Americans over the past few months but 
has been on my mind since 1993.
  Twenty election reform proposals have been introduced in the House of 
Representatives since the opening of the 107th Congress. I applaud the 
thoughtful and expedient response of my colleagues as I myself am soon 
to unveil my own proposal for strengthening America's voting system and 
have, in fact, organized my first town hall meeting during the 
President's Day recess on this specific issue.
  When I was elected Secretary of State for the great State of Rhode 
Island, it had the oldest voting equipment in the entire Nation. 
Beginning in 1993, as a State representative and then as Secretary of 
State, I worked with my colleagues in the legislature, the State Board 
of Elections, local canvassing authorities, and the public to 
investigate voting problems throughout the State and develop effective 
solutions.
  By May of 1994, our Commission reported the need to replace our 
antiquated Shoup lever voting machines with optical scanning equipment. 
Because it is cost effective, it would help increase voter 
participation.
  By the end of 1996, the procurement process had begun; and by 
September 1997 primary local elections, the optical scan equipment was 
firmly in place. In both 1998 and 2000 elections, these machines were 
in full operation throughout the State of Rhode Island.
  Implementation of the new optical scan equipment was cost effective 
because it was cost neutral. Rhode Island's revenue neutral laws 
ensured that the expenses for staffing, storage, and transportation of 
voting equipment and printing and mailing ballots all equal the cost of 
establishing this new system. We also met our goal of increasing voter 
participation by increasing the number of registered voters by nearly 
60,000 from 1993 to the year 2000.
  Finally, ensuring timely accuracy in tabulating votes was also a top 
priority. Because the optical scan machines read voting ballots by 
sensing the mark within a defined period indicating the vote, this 
method ensures the clear intent of the voter is transmitted and 
tabulated.
  This system also provides an audit trail for each ballot and enabled 
the use of ballots printed in multiple languages. However, since the 
machines were not accessible to blind or sight-impaired voters, I also 
introduced the Braille and Tactile ballot initiative to ensure that 
those who have lost their sight or are sight-impaired maintain their 
right to vote independently.

[[Page H352]]

  As Congress works with the President to explore ways to modernize the 
machinery of voting, I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in 
applying proven success stories such as what we have done in Rhode 
Island.
  Models exist for accurate, efficient, and cost-effective election 
reform, which we should utilize in our efforts to ensure true democracy 
in America. Our voters deserve no less.

                          ____________________