[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 14 (Thursday, February 14, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S838-S840]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SENATOR DODD'S BABY
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I also say to my friend, I had such a
pleasant time about half an hour ago. I went back to Room 219 and saw
Grace Dodd, his beautiful 6-month-old baby. As I said to Jackye, your
lovely wife: She is a real person, little Grace. And I bet the Senator
is very proud of her, as he should be.
Mr. DODD. Absolutely.
Amendment No. 2914, As Modified
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Schumer
amendment No. 2914 at the desk be modified with the language at the
desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment, as modified, is as follows:
(Purpose: To permit the use of a signature or personal mark for the
purpose of verifying the identity of voters who register by mail, and
for other purposes)
Beginning on page 18, line 20, strike through page 19, line
24, and insert the following:
(2) Requirements.--
(A) In general.--An individual meets the requirements of
this paragraph if the individual--
(i) in the case of an individual who votes in person--
(I) presents to the appropriate State or local election
official a current and valid photo identification;
(II) presents to the appropriate State or local election
official a copy of a current
[[Page S839]]
utility bill, bank statement, Government check, paycheck, or
other Government document that shows the name and address of
the voter;
(III) provides written affirmation on a form provided by
the appropriate State or local election official of the
individual's identity; or
(IV) provides a signature or personal mark that matches the
signature or personal mark of the individual on record with a
State or local election official; or
(ii) in the case of an individual who votes by mail,
submits with the ballot--
(I) a copy of a current and valid photo identification;
(II) a copy of a current utility bill, bank statement,
Government check, paycheck, or other Government document that
shows the name and address of the voter; or
(III) provides a signature or personal mark that matches
the signature or personal mark of the individual on record
with a State or local election official.
(B) Provisional voting.--An individual who desires to vote
in person, but who does not meet the requirements of
subparagraph (A)(i), may cast a provisional ballot under
section 102(a).
(3) Identity verification by signature or personal mark.--
(A) In general.--In lieu of the requirements of paragraph
(1), a State may require each individual described in such
paragraph to provide a signature or personal mark for the
purpose of matching such signature or mark with the signature
or personal mark of that individual on record with a State or
local election official.
On page 68, strike lines 19 and 20, and insert the
following:
(a) In General.--Nothing in this Act may be construed to
authorize
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following
list of amendments that I will send to the desk be the only first-
degree amendments remaining in order to S. 565, the election reform
bill; that these amendments be subject to second-degree amendments
which are relevant to the amendment to which it is offered; that upon
disposition of all amendments, the bill be read a third time, and the
Senate vote on passage of the bill; that upon passage, the title
amendment which is at the desk be agreed to, and the motion to
reconsider be laid upon the table, without any further intervening
action or debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The list is as follows:
First-Degree Amendments to S. 565, Election Reform
(Current as of 7:05 pm on Thursday, February 14, 2002)
Byrd: Relevant, Relevant to the list.
Cantwell: Relevant (3).
Cleland: Military and Disabled Voters (2), Amending short
title.
Clinton: Residual ballot rules.
Daschle: Relevant, Relevant to the list.
Dayton: Free and Reduced Mail-In Ballots, Pilot Program
(Amdt. 2897), Pilot Program (Amdt. 2898).
Dodd: Managers' Amendments, Criminal Penalties
Clarification, Relevant (2), Relevant to the list.
Durbin: Photo ID Alternative, Relevant.
Feinstein: Retro Activity, Relevant (5).
Harkin: Sense of Congress re: Access to polling place,
Protection & Advocacy Systems for the Disabled.
Hollings: Weekend elections, Using NIST.
Jeffords: Felon list, Minimum State funding, State plan,
First-time voters, Minimum State Funding II.
Kennedy: Safe Harbor.
Kerry: Election Day Holiday (Amdt. 2860).
Kohl: Weekend voting.
Landreiu: SoS local impact (Amdt. 2869), Federal holiday
(Amdt. 2868), Strike study on establishing Election Day as
holiday (Amdt. 2867).
Levin: Provisional ballot, Grant funds.
Lieberman: Recount standards.
Reed: Relevant (2).
Reid: Relevant, Relevant to the list.
Rockefeller: Overseas voters.
Sarbanes: Help America vote college program.
Schumer: Lever Machines, Age Box, Voter Registration,
First-Time Voters.
Torricelli: TV broadcasting.
Wyden: ID verification (Amdt 2870).
B. Smith: Military voting, Relevant.
Collins: Grant minimum.
Gramm: Military voting.
Sessions: Civic education, Mock election.
Lugar: Toll free hotline for fraud.
Enzi: Parking lot accessibility.
Grassley: Military voting, Voter registration, Overseas
voters.
McCain: Polling accessibility for disabled (3).
Specter: Relevant (3).
Bond: Relevant (3).
Roberts: Provisional voting, Notify voters.
Burns: Relevant, Election technology.
Kyl: Relevant (2).
Hatch: Relevant (2).
Ensign: Grant funding, Auditing.
Chafee: State Grant Payments.
Nickles: Relevant (2), Relevant to the list (2).
Thomas: Voter registration procedures, Exempt states,
Disabilities.
Stevens: Americans abroad.
McConnell: Relevant (2), Relevant to list (2).
Lott: Relevant (2), Relevant to list (2).
Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, discussions about the state of our
democracy too often focus on what is wrong with our political system.
Experts bemoan low turnout; they say young people are turned off by
politics; they say grassroots campaigns no longer can work in the age
of 30-second television ads.
But Americans cherish their democracy. Political participation allows
us to express our deepest held beliefs. When we fight for something we
believe in we are true participants in our democracy. I know this is
true because I saw it myself. Missourians during the last election,
even in the face of grief, went to the polls to make their will known.
The 2000 election, however, revealed a number of flaws in our electoral
machinery.
Far too many Americans were being disenfranchised without their
knowledge. Too many voters left the polling places in confusion; too
often registration lists had not been properly maintained.
The promise of American democracy is that everyone has the right to
vote without regard to their individual circumstance. It is our job to
make that promise a reality.
The Constitution calls for a decentralized system that puts states in
charge of elections. But since States hold elections for Federal
offices, it is appropriate for the Federal Government to encourage and
empower States to improve the voting process. I believe this bill does
just that and I am pleased to support it.
I congratulate the sponsors and those who have put many hours of hard
work to bringing this consensus bill to the floor.
This bill is framed around two basic premises: Those who are not
properly registered to vote are not allowed to cast a ballot, but for
those who are properly registered, we should make it as easy as
possible for them to go to the polls, vote, and have their vote
counted.
To those who say we need additional steps to eliminate voter fraud
and punish those who abuse the system, you are correct. We must work
harder to put systems in place that will adequately update voter rolls.
Many States and local registrars are plagued by insufficient
technology, and thus an inability to maintain databases that are
current. There must also be adequate voter education so that our
citizens understand what steps they must take to register properly. And
we must make sure that poll workers receive the appropriate training so
that we can reduce any potential issues at the polling places.
To those who say we must live up to the promise of our Constitution
and do all within our power to bring more people into the process, I
say your call must be heard.
This Nation's history is built on the fight for suffrage. To place
even the lowest hurdle before someone seeking to exercise the right to
vote is an affront to our democracy. This bill ensures that we go the
extra mile to protect the rights of those populations most vulnerable
to disenfranchisement: the elderly, the disabled, those who are not
fluent in English, ethnic and racial minorities, and members of the
armed services who are serving overseas.
Perhaps the most significant reform in this bill is that States will
be required to implement a system of provisional voting. From now on,
if someone's eligibility is challenged at the polling place, they will
have the right to cast a vote. If it turns out that the voter was
properly registered, his or her vote will be counted.
The bill will also prevent disenfranchisement by updating voting
technology. In the future, voters will know if they unintentionally
selected more than one candidate for a single office, or if their
ballots are not otherwise properly marked, and they will have a chance
to correct their ballots, and make sure their vote is counted. It is
common sense that when a system is broken, we must mend it.
When this system concerns a fundamental and cherished right, it is
not only common sense, it is vital to the health of our Nation.
[[Page S840]]
Our efforts today to empower voters remind me of the words of
President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who said:
Let us never forget that government is ourselves and not an
alien power over us. The ultimate rulers of our democracy are
not a President and senators and congressmen and government
officials, but the voters of this country.
Let us renew the promise of our great Nation and enact legislation
that will promote fairness, enhance participation, and increase our
faith in the greatest democracy in the history of the world.
north dakota voting procedures
Mr. CONRAD. As my colleague from Connecticut knows, North Dakota
currently operates a unique voting system in that we have no
registration system whatsoever for our State. This is a very open
system that I believe is very much in line with the intent of your
legislation to ensure the maximum amount of openness and accessibility
in our Nation's voting system. Am I correct in reading the language of
subparagraph 103(a)(1)(B) of the substitute amendment to allow North
Dakota to continue operating a registration-less voting system for
Federal elections in our State?
Mr. DODD. Yes, the clear text of this provision exempts states
without a registration requirement for its voters from having to
implement such a computerized system consistent with section 103. Put
simply, the exception provided in 103(a)(1)(B) exempts North Dakota
from all provisions of the bill concerning a computerized statewide
voter registration system. We simply did not want any of this bill's
provisions, either directly or indirectly, to interfere with North
Dakota's ability to continue operating its commendably open and
accessible registration-less system of voting.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Connecticut for
his aid in understanding this exemption. I also have a question with
regard to Section 102 of the bill--the provisional voting section. I
would like to describe the way North Dakota currently operates its
``voter challenge process'' to get my esteemed colleague's perspective
on whether our State currently satisfies the requirements of this
section.
In North Dakota, the members of an election board or poll challengers
may challenge the right of anyone to vote whom they know or have reason
to believe is not a qualified elector. A poll challenger or election
board member may request that a person offering to vote provide an
appropriate form of identification to address any voting eligibility
concerns, such as age, citizenship, or residency requirements. If the
identification provided does not adequately resolve the voter
eligibility concerns of the poll challenger or election board member,
the challenged person can execute an affidavit before the election
inspector affirming that the challenged person is a legally qualified
elector of the precinct. The affidavit must include the name and
address of the challenged voter and the address of the challenged voter
at the time the challenged voter last voted.
If the election inspector finds the affidavit valid on its face, the
challenged person is allowed to vote as any other voter does and his or
her voted ballot is deposited in the ballot box with the rest of the
voted ballots from the precinct and counted by a canvassing board, or
in the case of a recount by the recount board, in exactly the same
manner as a ballot cast by non-challenged voters. In other words, the
challenged person's voted ballot is not segregated or designated in any
special way for further or future inspection by election officials,
canvassing officials, recount officials, or legal authorities.
I ask my distinguished colleague the Senator from Connecticut whether
this current system satisfies the requirements of section 102 of his
bill.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I again commend the State of North Dakota's
open and accessible voting system. Our intent in drafting section 102
was to require that voters who were challenged, but felt that they had
the legal right to vote, were given the opportunity to cast a ballot
and then have that ballot set aside and verified. North Dakota's system
goes beyond this intent by being even more voter-friendly. Based on my
understanding of your description of North Dakota's system, North
Dakota should be able to continue operating its more voter-friendly
voter challenge system.
For example, paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4) of section 102 requires
election officials to verify the written affirmation of that voter's
eligibility before the ballot is counted. Under North Dakota State law,
as you have represented it to me, verification happens upon the
execution of a written affidavit. The fact that the verification by the
election official that is required under this bill occurs prior to the
ballot being cast instead of after the ballot is cast is a function of
North Dakota's registration-less system. It therefore satisfies all of
the requirements of section 102(a).
I should point out that under subsection 102(a)(5), the individual
who voted via affidavit will need to be provided written notification
at the time he casts his or her ballot that he or she will not receive
any further notification--because as a matter of state law, that
person's vote has been counted. This could easily be done by handing
out a generic form to each voter who votes via affidavit.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I greatly appreciate the Senator from
Connecticut taking the time to answer my questions about his bill. I
also want to take this time to commend the Senator for his terrific
leadership and work on the very important issue of election reform.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in
morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________