[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 38 (Wednesday, April 10, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2466-S2477]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EQUAL PROTECTION OF VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF 2001--Continued
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I am going to send three amendments to the
desk: A managers' amendment offered by myself and Senator McConnell, an
amendment offered by Senator Wyden, which I will be offering on his
behalf, and an amendment I will be offering on behalf of Mr.
Rockefeller. I ask unanimous consent that those three amendments, along
with an amendment that my colleague and friend from Kentucky will offer
on behalf of Senator Hatch, be considered en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Amendments Nos. 3104, 3105, and 3106 En Bloc
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Dodd] proposes amendments
numbered 3104, 3105, and 3106 en bloc.
The amendments are as follows:
amendment no. 3104
(Purpose: To modify the requirements for voters who register by mail,
and for other purposes)
On page 15, between lines 2 and 3, insert the following:
(b) Voters Who Vote After the Polls Close.--Any individual
who votes in an election for Federal office for any reason,
including a Federal or State court order, after the time set
for closing the polls by a State law in effect 10 days before
the date of that election may only vote in that election by
casting a provisional ballot under subsection (a).
On page 18, strike lines 17 through 19, and insert the
following:
(B)(i) the individual has not previously voted in an
election for Federal office in the State; or
(ii) the individual has not previously voted in such an
election in the jurisdiction and the jurisdiction is located
in a State that does not have a computerized list that
complies with the requirements of section 103(a).
On page 21, strike lines 19 through 23, and insert the
following:
(2) Requirement for voters who register by mail.--
(A) In general.--Each State and locality shall be required
to comply with the requirements of subsection (b) on and
after January 1, 2004, and shall be prepared to receive
registration materials submitted by individuals described in
subparagraph (B) on and after the date described in such
subparagraph.
(B) Applicability with respect to individuals.--The
provisions of section (b) shall apply to any individual who
registers to vote on or after January 1, 2003.
On page 22, strike line 17, and insert the following:
brought under this Act against such State or locality on the
basis
On page 22, after line 25, insert the following:
SEC. ____. MINIMUM STANDARDS.
The requirements established by this title are minimum
requirements and nothing in this title shall be construed to
prevent a State from establishing election technology and
administration requirements, that are more strict than the
requirements established under this title, so long as such
State requirements are not inconsistent with the Federal
requirements under this title or any law described in section
402.
On page 25, strike line 20, and insert the following:
existing Federal laws, as such laws relate to the provisions
of this Act, including the following:
On page 27, strike line 11, and insert the following:
(c) Safe Harbor.--No action may be brought under this Act
[[Page S2467]]
On page 33, strike line 12, and insert the following:
the following laws, as such laws relate to the provisions of
this Act:
On page 34, strike line 23, and insert the following:
(d) Safe Harbor.--No action may be brought under this Act
On page 44, strike line 1, and insert the following:
(d) Safe Harbor.--No action may be brought under this Act
On page 53, between lines 15 and 16, insert the following:
(1) Study of first time voters who register by mail.--
(A) Study.--
(i) In general.--The Commission shall conduct a study of
the impact of section 103(b) on voters who register by mail.
(ii) Specific issues studied.--The study conducted under
clause (i) shall include--
(I) an examination of the impact of section 103(b) on first
time mail registrant voters who vote in person, including the
impact of such section on voter registration;
(II) an examination of the impact of such section on the
accuracy of voter rolls, including preventing ineligible
names from being placed on voter rolls and ensuring that all
eligible names are placed on voter rolls; and
(III) an analysis of the impact of such section on existing
State practices, such as the use of signature verification or
attestation procedures to verify the identity of voters in
elections for Federal office, and an analysis of other
changes that may be made to improve the voter registration
process, such as verification or additional information on
the registration card.
(B) Report.--Not later than 18 months after the date on
which section 103(b)(2)(A) takes effect, the Commission shall
submit a report to the President and Congress on the study
conducted under subparagraph (A)(i) together with such
recommendations for administrative and legislative action as
the Commission determines is appropriate.
On page 68, strike lines 19 and 20, and insert the
following:
(a) In General.--Except as specifically provided in section
103(b) of this Act with regard to the National Voter
Registration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 1973gg et seq.), nothing
in this Act may be construed to authorize
____
amendment no. 3105
(Purpose: To modify the requirements for individuals who register to
vote by mail)
On page 19, strike lines 20 through 24, and insert the
following:
(B) Fail-safe voting.--
(i) In person.--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).
(ii) By mail.--An individual who desires to vote by mail
but who does not meet the requirements of subparagraph
(A)(ii) may cast such a ballot by mail and the ballot shall
be counted as a provisional ballot in accordance with section
102(a).
On page 20, between lines 12 through 13, insert the
following:
(B)(i) who registers to vote by mail under section 6 of the
National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 1973gg-4)
and submits with such registration either--
(I) a driver's license number; or
(II) at least the last 4 digits of the individual's social
security number; and
(ii) with respect to whom a State or local election
official certifies that the information submitted under
clause (i) matches an existing State identification record
bearing the same number, name and date of birth as provided
in such registration; or
____
amendment no. 3106
(Purpose: To meet the needs of both military and civilian overseas
voters by providing treatment more nearly equal to that of at-home
voters)
On page 68, between lines 2 and 3, insert the following:
SEC. ____. STUDY AND REPORT ON PERMANENT REGISTRATION OF
OVERSEAS VOTERS; DISTRIBUTION OF OVERSEAS
VOTING INFORMATION BY A SINGLE STATE OFFICE;
STUDY AND REPORT ON EXPANSION OF SINGLE STATE
OFFICE DUTIES.
(a) Study and Report on Permanent Registration of Overseas
Voters.--
(1) Study.--The Election Administration Commission
established under section 301 (in this subsection referred to
as the ``Commission''), shall conduct a study on the
feasibility and advisability of providing for permanent
registration of overseas voters under section 104 of the
Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (42
U.S.C. 1973ff-3), as amended by section 1606(b) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002
(Public Law 107-107; 115 Stat. 1279) and this title.
(2) Report.--The Commission shall submit a report to
Congress on the study conducted under paragraph (1) together
with such recommendations for legislative and administrative
action as the Commission determines appropriate.
(b) Distribution of Overseas Voting Information by a Single
State Office.--Section 102 of the Uniformed and Overseas
Citizens Absentee Voting Act (42 U.S.C. 1973ff-1), as amended
by section 1606(a)(1) of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107; 115 Stat. 1278)
and the preceding provisions of this title, is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(c) Designation of Single State Office To Provide
Information on Registration and Absentee Ballot Procedures
for All Voters in the State.--Each State shall designate a
single office which shall be responsible for providing
information regarding voter registration procedures and
absentee ballot procedures to be used by absent uniformed
services voters and overseas voters with respect to elections
for Federal office (including procedures relating to the use
of the Federal write-in absentee ballot) to all absent
uniformed services voters and overseas voters who wish to
register to vote or vote in any jurisdiction in the State.''.
(c) Study and Report on Expansion of Single State Office
Duties.--
(1) Study.--The Election Administration Commission
established under section 301 (in this subsection referred to
as the ``Commission''), shall conduct a study on the
feasibility and advisability of making the State office
designated under section 102(c) of the Uniformed and Overseas
Citizens Absentee Voting Act (as added by subsection (b))
responsible for the acceptance of valid voter registration
applications, absentee ballot applications, and absentee
ballots (including Federal write-in absentee ballots) from
each absent uniformed services voter or overseas voter who
wishes to register to vote or vote in any jurisdiction in the
State.
(2) Report.--The Commission shall submit a report to
Congress on the study conducted under paragraph (1) together
with such recommendations for legislative and administrative
action as the Commission determines appropriate.
SEC. ____. REPORT ON ABSENTEE BALLOTS TRANSMITTED AND
RECEIVED AFTER GENERAL ELECTIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 102 of the Uniformed and Overseas
Citizens Absentee Voting Act (42 U.S.C. 1973ff-1), as amended
by the preceding provisions of this title, is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(d) Report on Number of Absentee Ballots Transmitted and
Received.--Not later than 120 days after the date of each
regularly scheduled general election for Federal office, each
State and unit of local government that administered the
election shall (through the State, in the case of a unit of
local government) submit a report to the Election
Administration Commission (established under the Martin
Luther King, Jr. Equal Protection of Voting Rights Act of
2002) on the number of absentee ballots transmitted to absent
uniformed services voters and overseas voters for the
election and the number of such ballots that were returned by
such voters and cast in the election, and shall make such
report available to the general public.''.
(b) Development of Standardized Format for Reports.--The
Election Administration Commission shall develop a
standardized format for the reports submitted by States and
units of local government under section 102(d) of the
Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (as added
by subsection (a)), and shall make the format available to
the States and units of local government submitting such
reports.
SEC. ____. OTHER REQUIREMENTS TO PROMOTE PARTICIPATION OF
OVERSEAS AND ABSENT UNIFORMED SERVICES VOTERS.
Section 102 of the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee
Voting Act (42 U.S.C. 1973ff-1), as amended by the preceding
provisions of this title, is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(e) Registration Notification.--With respect to each
absent uniformed services voter and each overseas voter who
submits a voter registration application or an absentee
ballot request, if the State rejects the application or
request, the State shall provide the voter with the reasons
for the rejection.''.
SEC. ____. STUDY AND REPORT ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF A STANDARD
OATH FOR USE WITH OVERSEAS VOTING MATERIALS.
(a) Study.--The Election Administration Commission
established under section 301 (in this section referred to as
the ``Commission''), shall conduct a study on the feasibility
and advisability of--
(1) prescribing a standard oath for use with any document
under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act
(42 U.S.C. 1973ff et seq) affirming that a material
misstatement of fact in the completion of such a document may
constitute grounds for a conviction for perjury; and
(2) if the State requires an oath or affirmation to
accompany any document under such Act, to require the State
to use the standard oath described in paragraph (1).
(b) Report.--The Commission shall submit a report to
Congress on the study conducted under subsection (a) together
with such recommendations for legislative and administrative
action as the Commission determines appropriate.
SEC. ____. STUDY AND REPORT ON PROHIBITING NOTARIZATION
REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Study.--The Election Administration Commission
established under section 301 (in this section referred to as
the ``Commission''), shall conduct a study on the feasibility
and advisability of prohibiting a State from refusing to
accept any voter registration application, absentee ballot
request, or absentee ballot submitted by an absent uniformed
services voter or overseas voter on the grounds that the
document involved is not notarized.
(b) Report.--The Commission shall submit a report to
Congress on the study conducted
[[Page S2468]]
under subsection (a) together with such recommendations for
legislative and administrative action as the Commission
determines appropriate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate the question is
on agreeing to the amendments?
The amendments (Nos. 3104, 3105, and 3106) were agreed to en bloc.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. DODD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Amendment No. 3107
Mr. McCONNELL. I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of Senator
Hatch.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McConnell] proposes an amendment
numbered 3107.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Amendments
Submitted''.)
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise in support of my amendment to the
bipartisan Equal Protection and Voting Rights Act of 2002. First let me
thank my colleagues Senators Dodd, McConnell, Schumer, McCain,
Torricelli, and Bond for all the hard work that they have put into this
bill. I also want to thank Senator Leahy and Senator Cantwell for
cosponsoring this amendment, which will lay the groundwork for
integrating new technology into the political process. Their expertise
on technological issues made their input invaluable.
Why is voter turnout so low? According to a recently released Census
Bureau report, of the 19 million people who registered but did not vote
in the 200 election, more than one in five reported that they did not
vote because they were too busy. Despite the close nature of the 2000
election, the 55 percent voter turnout rate was just barely better than
the 1996 record low. Registration rates also dropped significantly
between the 1996 and 200 Presidential elections. Can technological
advances, like the Internet, increase participation in the electoral
process by making voter registration easier or by simplifying the
method of voting itself? As the elected representatives of the people,
we should consider every option available that might help involve more
of our country's citizens in America's democratic process. Federal,
State, and local governments are duty bound to encourage all eligible
Americans to exercise their right to vote.
As many of us have seen in the recent past, more and more State are
looking at ways to utilize the Internet in the political process.
Proposals include online voter registration, online access to voter
information, and online voting. State and local officials around the
country are anxious to use the Internet to foster civic action. I think
that this is a positive step. Real questions remain, however, as to the
feasibility of securely using the Internet for these functions. How can
we be sure that the person who registers to vote online is whom he or
she claims to be? How can we ensure that an Internet voting process is
free from fraud? How much will this technology cost? There are also
important sociological and political questions to consider. For
example, will options like online registration and voting increase
political participation, or could the Internet be equitably used in the
political process? These and other questions deserve our attention.
The Hatch-Leahy amendment neutrally addresses these issues in two
ways: one, it establishes a bipartisan advisory committee that will
provide a necessary framework for discussing the possible uses and
abuses of the Internet in the voting process; and two, it directs the
Attorney General to review existing criminal statutes and penalties and
report to the Senate and the advisory committee whether additional
penalties for interfering with online registration and voting are
needed.
No American who has exercised his or her right to vote should ever
have to wonder if their properly cast vote will be counted. We must
preserve the integrity of the voting process and I commend the efforts
of those who have drafted this bill. The Hatch-Leahy amendment
complements the bill and will help ensure the legitimacy of the voting
process. As we continue to address the current problems with our voting
process, we can and should take this opportunity to examine the impact
of new technologies on our elections.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, this amendment has been approved on
both sides.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is
on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 3107) was agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. DODD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the Senator from Kansas is here and
prepared to offer an amendment.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at the
completion of the remarks by the Senator from Kansas, the Senator from
New York, Mrs. Clinton, be recognized to debate her amendment, if that
would be appropriate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
Amendment No. 2907
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I have at the desk an amendment numbered
2907, and I ask for its consideration at this time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Kansas [Mr. Roberts] proposes anamendment
numbered 2907.
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To eliminate the administrative procedures of requiring
election officials to notify voters by mail whether or not their
individual vote was counted)
On page 12, beginning with line 20, strike through page 14,
line 2, and insert the following:
(5) At the time that an individual casts a provisional
ballot, the appropriate State or local election official
shall give the individual written information that states
that any individual who casts a provisional ballot will be
able to ascertain through a free access system (such as a
toll-free telephone number or an Internet website) whether
the vote was counted, and, if the vote was not counted, the
reason that the vote was not counted.
(6) The appropriate State or local election official shall
establish a free access system (such as a toll-free telephone
number or an Internet website) that any individual who casts
a provisional ballot may access to discover whether the vote
of that individual was counted, and, if the vote was not
counted, the reason that the vote was not counted.
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, this amendment is offered by myself and
the distinguished Senator from California, Mrs. Feinstein, and the
distinguished Senator from Michigan, Mr. Levin.
I also ask unanimous consent that the distinguished Senator from
Kentucky, Mr. McConnell, be added as a cosponsor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I rise today, along with my friend from
California to offer an amendment to the provisional voting section
under the election reform bill.
This amendment improves on the voting requirement found on Section
102 (page 13.) Specifically, current language requires--emphasize the
word ``requires''--election officials to notify voters in writing by
mail, within 30 days after the election as to whether their provisional
vote was counted.
Our amendment eliminates the 30 day mail notification requirement.
Instead, it requires states to implement a free-access system so the
voter can find out quickly and efficiently whether his or her vote was
counted. This can be done through an Internet web site, a toll-free
number, or by any means available, so long as voters have access to
this information.
We think the current language on provisional voting is restrictive.
By communicating through mail, we run the risk of voters never knowing
whether a vote was counted. Incorrect
[[Page S2469]]
addresses and lost mail are all factors to consider.
Let us also remember that the Senate's own mail system was in turmoil
3 months after the anthrax attacks. So you really don't know what to
expect. As we painfully discovered, the mail is very vulnerable. It is
not unlikely that a similar scenario could take place during an
election year.
Secondly, the whole purpose of this debate is to improve the election
process. Now, I have been told, with some very good advice by my good
friend, Secretary Ron Thornburg, the secretary of state in Kansas and
the president of the National Association of Secretaries of State,
representing all secretaries of state all throughout the country, that
sending out mass mailings within 30 days of an election or primary is
very burdensome and costly. He writes:
I do not believe it is reasonable or expedient to require
the election officer to formally notify the voter by mail as
to the disposition of the ballot. If written into law, this
provision will cause unnecessary burden and expense to
election officers who are very busy after the election
finalizing vote tabulations and preparing for official
certification of election results.
What am I talking about?
Let's just examine the duties that are performed by election officers
during the 30-day period after an election all across the country. They
must--and I am going to itemize some things right now--conduct campaign
finance report deadlines. They must prepare a national/State election
abstract for submission to the secretary of state. They must prepare
ballots, and the tabulation of results, and other election materials.
They must research the provisional ballots to determine whether or not
they are valid. They must conduct recounts of primaries if requested.
They must begin to prepare for the general election, including the
finalizing of the candidate lists and ballot forms and precinct
election board worker appointments. They also have to update the voter
registration rolls.
Now, that is a lot of work to do immediately after an election. And
those are just a few duties in a laundry list of obligations that all
election officers must complete after an election. Further, in the 2000
general election, over 22,000 provisional votes were cast in the State
of Kansas alone. Sending out a 30-day mass mailing is another burden
added for these election officials--22,000.
We do not advocate--we do not advocate--a prohibition on anyone from
obtaining information as to whether a vote was counted or not--that is
absolutely essential--but let's not ignore what I call common sense.
Having a free access system is not burdensome on voters.
If this is a problem in small States, it is magnified a thousand
times in the larger States. Take California. This is why the
distinguished Senator from California, Mrs. Feinstein, is a cosponsor
of the bill. Bradley J. Clark, president of the California Association
of Clerks and Election Officials, wrote a letter expressing concern
with these requirements. He wrote:
We specifically oppose the section that would establish rigid
requirements and time lines for notifying hundreds of thousands of
provisional voters whether or not their provisional ballots were
counted. The provisional voter notification provisions currently
written in the bill would do nothing more than antagonize those voters
who were determined ineligible.
Election officials can make better use of their time in improving the
election process rather than exerting energy and resources on mass
mailings. This amendment does not eliminate the use of mass mailings.
Let me repeat this: We are not saying you can't use a mass mailing.
States can do this if they want. I would advise the distinguished
Senator from Connecticut, who has a lot of concern about this, that
States can go ahead and use the mass mailing provision if they want. It
does not eliminate it. Nor does it eliminate the 10-day notification
requirement. If a State wishes to contact voters by mail, they can
retain that right. Our amendment simply gives the election officials
that option or the State that option.
Now, some might ask, What is wrong with requiring the 30-day mailing
along with the free access system? Why don't we retain both? The answer
to that is very simple. It gives provisional voters a false sense of
reliance that they will be notified by mail. In other words, if they
believe they will receive a mailing, why would they then make an effort
to check any other means of communication--either a toll-free number
or, say, by simply using a Web site?
Again, change of address, loss in the mail, and the ever looming
threat of some kind of attack on our postal system make mail a less
reliable means of communication.
A centralized calling system does not--does not--in any form
disenfranchise voters. We need to have faith in a voter's ability to
make a simple phone call or visit their local library to use their
computer facilities. This does not create an undue burden. Rather, it
is an undue burden if we give voters false reliance that they may or
may not receive any notification through the mail.
Here is something else I would really bring to the attention of the
distinguished Senator from Connecticut. It is important that we
register voters. Under this amendment, a voter will know within 10 days
whether their vote was counted or whether they need to register. Let me
repeat that. A voter is going to be informed within 10 days. With the
mail, they may not know for 3 or even 4 weeks the status of their vote
cast in a primary, giving them less time to register for a general
election.
If we adopt this amendment, we are going to have more people
registered, more people taking part in the election process.
Finally, the goal of this bill is to improve the election process.
Let's give election officials more time to improve administration,
rather than burden them with more mass mailings that may or may not be
received by the voter. This is a simple, commonsense approach that
gives voters a greater chance of knowing whether their vote was
counted. It has support from the other side of the aisle, from all
election officials, all secretaries of state. I ask for its adoption.
I yield the floor.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, This is a very simple amendment that
addresses a serious concern raised by State and local election
officials.
The underlying bill provides a mechanism for voters to ascertain the
disposition of their ballot--through a free access system, such as a
telephone or internet site or another means which they can create.
The bill goes further to require State or local officials to notify
in writing if a provisional ballot is not counted. This is the
provision which has caused a great deal of angst among those who
administer our elections.
The administrative task and cost involved with implementing this
requirement could be enormous in heavily populated States. It also will
subject the individual who signs the letter to a great deal of
criticism, scrutiny and potential legal action.
This amendment makes sense and does not undermine a voter's ability
to determine whether their provisional ballot was counted. The free
access system will provide unfettered access to this information.
I urge my colleagues to join with the bipartisan cosponsors in
support of this amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
Amendment No. 3108
Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask
that it be called up for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to laying aside the pending
amendment?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will report the amendment.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from New York [Mrs. Clinton] proposes an
amendment numbered 3108.
Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To establish a residual ballot performance benchmark)
Beginning on page 8, line 19, strike through page 9, line
3, and insert the following:
(5) Error rates.--
(A) In general.--The error rate of the voting system in
counting ballots (determined by taking into account only
those errors
[[Page S2470]]
which are attributable to the voting system and not
attributable to an act of the voter) shall not exceed the
error rate standards established under the voting systems
standards issued and maintained by the Director of the Office
of Election Administration of the Federal Election Commission
(as revised by the Director of such Office under subsection
(c)).
(B) Residual ballot performance benchmark.--In addition to
the error rate standards described in subparagraph (A), the
Director of the Office of Election Administration of the
Federal Election Commission shall issue and maintain a
uniform benchmark for the residual ballot error rate that
jurisdictions may not exceed. For purposes of the preceding
sentence, the residual vote error rate shall be equal to the
combination of overvotes, spoiled or uncountable votes, and
undervotes cast in the contest at the top of the ballot, but
excluding an estimate, based upon the best available
research, of intentional undervotes. The Director shall base
the benchmark issued and maintained under this subparagraph
on evidence of good practice in representative jurisdictions.
(C) Historically high intentional undervotes.--
(i) The Senate finds that there are certain distinct
communities in certain geographic areas that have
historically high rates of intentional undervoting in
elections for Federal office, relative to the rest of the
Nation.
(ii) In establishing the benchmark described in
subparagraph (B), the Director of the Office of Election
Administration of the Federal Election Commission shall--
(I) study and report to Congress on the occurrences of
distinct communities that have significantly higher than
average rates of historical intentional undervoting; and
(II) promulgate for local jurisdictions in which that
distinct community has a substantial presence either a
separate benchmark or an exclusion from the national
benchmark, as appropriate.
Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, the amendment I offer today is very
similar to the amendment I offered a number of weeks ago at the
beginning of this important debate. I appreciate the great support and
good suggestions my colleagues have provided. And I particularly thank
a colleague who suggested that this amendment should be entitled--
rather than the ``Residual Vote Error Rates'' amendment, which is a
mouthful--the ``Leave No Vote Behind'' amendment.
So that is how I shall refer to it. Why? Because this amendment is
about ensuring that we do just that: Leave no vote behind, that we do
everything we reasonably can to ensure that everyone's vote is counted.
This amendment is neither liberal nor conservative. It is neither
Democrat nor Republican. But it goes to the very heart of the
reliability and accountability of our electoral system.
Every voter who goes to the polls or votes by absentee or votes in
any other manner that is appropriate under our laws should know that
that effort was not in vain. It is truly American to ensure that we
give every one of our citizens the confidence to believe our Federal
election system is the best it can be. Therefore, this amendment is
critical to our deliberations because year after year--not just in 2000
but in every year--in every State, ballots were not counted because of
so-called residual votes. There are overvotes. There are undervotes.
There are spoiled votes. According to the Caltech/MIT Report:
Over the past four presidential elections [going back,
therefore, 16 years] the rate of residual votes in
presidential elections was slightly over two percent. This
means that in a typical presidential election over 2 million
voters did not have a presidential vote recorded for their
ballots.
The percentage of discarded ballots is even higher in a Senate
election, which, I suppose, should get us all thinking.
But it is imperative we recognize that some of these are legitimate
errors. Some of these are the problems that elderly people have in
punching the little chad through the hole. Some of it is confusion with
respect to the appropriate place to make the mark which is made.
For all the reasons that lie behind these uncounted votes, the
Commission, headed by former Presidents Ford and Carter, recommended,
unanimously, that Congress needs to focus not just on the machine or
mechanical errors in improving our election system, but on the
unintentional human errors as well. The Commission did so because only
by measuring the rate of these residual vote errors will we be able to
assess effectively whether the voting process as a whole is giving all
of our citizens the equal opportunity to have their votes counted.
That is why I have offered this amendment, which would require the
newly established Office of Election Administration to establish a
residual vote error rate, a standard or benchmark with which voting
systems will have to comply. It is a transfer of authority and
expertise to the body that we are setting up to make determinations
about our mechanical and machine errors.
Since I offered this amendment back in February, it has been
improved, thanks to the suggestions made by Senator Bingaman, who asked
to be shown as an original cosponsor. He proposed and now included in
the leave no vote behind amendment language that would give the Office
of Election Administration even greater flexibility in setting the
residual error rate standard.
Senator Bingaman pointed out there are certain distinct communities
in some parts of our country that have a historically high rate of
intentional undervoting in elections for Federal office compared to the
rest of the country. Therefore, the language added by Senator Bingaman
requires the Office of Election Administration to report to Congress on
the extent to which this is happening and permits the office either to
set a separate benchmark or exclude whole areas. This gives us the
requisite flexibility that the office requires, and I certainly hope
our colleagues will support this amendment because, in the absence of
taking some action on this issue, we are not going to be responding to
what were the most serious questions raised in the past election.
This is also in keeping with the other voting system standards in the
bill. The mechanical rate standard, as important as that is, does not
address this human error rate.
Before I lose my voice and leave it behind, I would certainly urge my
colleagues' support of this important amendment that would leave no
vote behind and give greater assurance to voters no matter where they
live that their votes truly will be counted.
I yield back my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I rise in strong opposition to the
amendment offered by the Senator from New York. The bill currently
provides for benchmark error rates for voting systems used in Federal
elections. This bill appropriately provides that, in determining the
error rate, only those errors which are attributable to voting machines
are included. Errors attributable to an act of the voter, such as an
overvote, spoiled vote, or undervote, are not included in the
benchmark. This amendment would wrongly require a second benchmark
error rate for voter errors. In other words, ballots intentionally or
unintentionally spoiled by a voter would be included in the error rate.
As long as there have been elections, there has been voter error.
State and local officials will tell you that they see voter error in
every single election.
As the Ford-Carter commission acknowledged, some portion of the
residual vote number comes from intentional undervotes which can vary
considerably from place to place, along with local cultures and
tradition. I can say for myself, I frequently have not voted in every
single race on the ballot, particularly for races where I felt I didn't
know enough about the candidates to cast a vote. It is an intentional
act on my part.
A State can't force people to follow directions. A State can't force
people to vote as we would like them to or as we think they should.
This amendment will do just that.
Let's look at what the review of uncounted Florida ballots in the
2000 election revealed about intentionally spoiled ballots. Nearly
1,000 people voted for all 10 Presidential candidates in 2000. More
than 3,600 people voted for every Presidential candidate except Bush,
and more than 700 people voted for every Presidential candidate except
Gore.
More recently, in Palm Beach, FL made infamous in the 2000 elections
county election officials spent $14 million upgrading voting equipment
to touch screen computers. In an election held last month, the
undervote was 3 percent. No matter what you do, some people are simply
not going to participate or are going to participate in a way that we
might find somewhat odd.
Primaries held in Chicago last month showed that the undervote varies
widely. In Chicago, new ballot machines
[[Page S2471]]
give voters the chance to fix a voting mistake. The machines inform
voters if they have undervoted or overvoted, and they are offered the
option of correcting that ballot or casting a new one.
The Chicago Tribune reported that even with these new machines, in
the Democratic primary for Governor, 6.1 percent of the voters did not
vote for the race at the top of the ticket. They just chose not to. The
undervote in the Republican attorney general's race was a whopping 12.5
percent. They didn't like these guys. They chose not to vote in that
race.
This amendment proposes to set a number of so-called residual votes
or voter errors that would be allowed. What would happen when the so-
called benchmark is exceeded? The Department of Justice would sue
States and localities which have residual rates above those which are
permitted by the Federal Government. The practical effect is that
States will calculate how many residual votes they are permitted in an
election, divide those by precinct, and notify those poll workers how
many residual votes they are allowed. In calculating this allowance,
officials will have to account for errors on absentee ballots as there
is nothing that can be done to change those ballots.
Poll workers will monitor how many residual votes they have. And when
they approach their limit under threat of Department of Justice
prosecution, they will force voters to vote, or change how they voted
in an election. This is exactly the wrong approach.
This bill focuses our efforts on the right approach. It provides a
benchmark for measuring the reliability of voting machines. It provides
for increasing voter education and encouraging voter responsibility. If
a voter has a question, they should ask it. If they are unsure about
the voting process, they should seek assistance. We must preserve a
system that values and respects the secrecy of the ballot.
Therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote against the Clinton
amendment.
Amendment No. 3109
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, there is an amendment by Senator
Nickles that has been cleared on both sides. I send that amendment to
the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McConnell], for Mr. Nickles,
proposes an amendment numbered 3109.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
On page 18 between lines 7 and 8; insert: (4) technological
security of computerized list. The appropriate state or local
official shall provide adequate technological security
measures to prevent the unauthorized access to the
computerized list established under this section.
Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I compliment Senator McConnell, Senator
Dodd, Senator Bond, and Senator Schumer on their hard work on this
election reform bill. I would also like to thank them for adding what I
think is a very important provision to this bill.
The bill mandates that States implement a computerized statewide
voter registration list, creating a central database that will allow
State and local election officials continuous access to ensure that new
registered voters are added and that individuals whose names should be
removed from the list are removed. This computerized list will prove to
be an important tool in ensuring that only registered eligible voters
be allowed to vote. In creating this interactive computerized list,
though, it is important that only those officials who are authorized be
granted access to this list. In furtherance of this goal, my amendment
directs State and local election officials to establish and maintain
reasonable procedures to protect the security and integrity of the
computerized list.
As interactive computer programs become more prevalent and more
personal information is transmitted and stored via such programs, we
must constantly seek to protect personal information secure from theft.
In our effect to create a system that allows for easier maintenance of
voter rolls, we must make sure that we don't make available information
that will allow computer hackers to manipulate voter rolls as well as
access our bank accounts, charge accounts or other personal
information.
This amendment seeks to strengthen the security and confidentiality
of information displayed via the interactive computerized list. The
amendment's purpose is to keep the interactive list secure. It is not
meant to limit information to the public that is otherwise available.
Again, I thank Senators Dodd and McConnell for their hard work on this
bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If
not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 3109) was agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. DODD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Amendment No. 3110
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of
Senator Levin.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Dodd], for Mr. Levin,
proposes an amendment numbered 3110.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To permit voter information contained in a written
affirmation to be used to verify the eligibility of an individual to
vote in an election for Federal office, rather than the provisional
ballot, for the purpose of determining whether that provisional ballot
should be counted as a vote in that election)
On page 12, strike lines 9 through 19, and insert the
following:
(3) An election official at the polling place shall
transmit the ballot cast by the individual or voter
information contained in the written affirmation executed by
the individual under paragraph (2) to an appropriate State or
local election official for prompt verification under
paragraph (4).
(4) If the appropriate State or local election official to
whom the ballot or voter information is transmitted under
paragraph (3) determines that the individual is eligible
under State law to vote in the jurisdiction, the individual's
provisional ballot shall be counted as a vote in that
election.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, my amendment will ensure that the Michigan
system of provisional voting, a highly progressive system, will not be
disturbed or disrupted by the language of this bill.
Michigan is often cited as an example of a ``best practices'' state
in terms of elections. Provisional voting works like this in Michigan:
on election day, if a voter's name does not appear on the precinct
polling list; the election workers verify whether the voter is actually
registered in the jurisdiction. This means that the election workers
check with the computerized statewide voter file, in Michigan; this is
called the Qualified Voter File, or QVF. The voter signs an affidavit
asserting that a voter registration was submitted prior to the close of
state registration and identifies himself or herself. The voter than
completes a new voter registration application and is issued a ballot.
The ballot is cast and counted on election day; however, the ballot is
tagged in a manner that permits a court of law in a contested election
case to connect the voter to the specific ballot if it is later
determined the voter was not qualified to cast the ballots.
This provisional voting system works well in Michigan and I would
like to ensure that Michigan is able to maintain its system under the
pending legislation. I have spoken with several county and statewide
election officials in Michigan, who have raised concerns that Michigan
might be inadvertently required under the pending bill to alter the way
Michigan currently conducts provisional voting.
My amendment will ensure that will not happen and I greatly
appreciate the managers accepting this amendment.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, this amendment has also been cleared on both
sides. I urge its adoption.
[[Page S2472]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate? If not, the question
is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 3110) was agreed to.
Amendment No. 2907
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, if I may take a minute or so--I know Senator
Bond is here; we are waiting for a couple of other Senators who may
come over--for just a brief comment on Senator Roberts' amendment.
I don't know if there is anyone in this Chamber for whom the body has
more affection than Pat Roberts of Kansas, let me say very loudly and
clearly, having described him as the Senator from Nebraska. I apologize
to him and his State for that--not that Nebraska is not a fine State, I
quickly add.
Let me say to my colleague and to others on the Roberts amendment--
there are a couple of other people who have joined with him on the
amendment--my concern about it. We worked on this bill with provisional
balloting which is a very important and significant part of this bill.
People who go in to vote are going to cast a ballot even when there
is a debate about whether or not they have a right to be there. Setting
aside that provisional ballot, if in fact there is that debate, if the
voter is correct, that ballot will be counted; if not, it will not be
counted. We will never again be faced with a system, once this
provision becomes part of the law in 2004, where a person will be
thrown out of line without casting a provisional ballot. In a sense,
all eligible voters will be able to exercise your franchise.
The issue is this. I understand my colleague's point. The question
is, once that ballot has been cast, the State or the locality can then
inform the voter whether or not the provisional ballot actually was
counted or not, and if it was not counted, why not, so the voter can
then correct that mistake. The point Senator Bond made--and we have
constantly quoted him on this--that ``this bill is designed to make it
easier to vote and harder to cheat.''
The particular point I am trying to make goes to the first part of
that sentence--``easier to vote.'' When a person goes to the poll,
casts a ballot, and believe they are registered when it turns out, in
fact the State or local election official has not registered the voter,
then there is a 1-800 number, or something else they might call in on.
I think such access is essential. It may help alleviate the need for a
piece of mail going out. It may help eliminate the responsibility to
notify the voter that there is a problem, that his or her vote did not
count because proper action was not taken and this is what needs to be
done. These kinds of mechanisms can help break the chain of continuous
disenfranchisement.
I think this goes to the heart of the purpose of provisional
balloting. This means that the voter does not show up again at the next
election and say: I voted the last time. And they would say: That is
true, but your vote didn't count. They might say: You could have called
me. You could argue which side has the responsibility. However, I don't
think it is asking too much to let the voter know the circumstances. As
a result, the voter can correct his or her mistake and become a fully
franchised participant in the elections process. That is the heart of
this matter.
For those reasons, I will be urging our colleagues to vote against
the Roberts amendment when it comes up for consideration tomorrow.
Again, I have great respect for my colleague from Kansas. He makes a
point that is not without merit. I will not suggest this is totally
without merit since because there is an attempt to try to at least stay
on track with ensuring the constitutionally guaranteed right to vote to
each eligible voter and to make it easier to cast a provisional ballot.
However, the amendment would not serve the goal of helping such
eligible voters overcome circumstances that preserve their status as a
provisional voters and would not permit such voters to easily correct
mistakes. That is the reason I will, with some degree of reluctance,
urge defeat of the amendment. Others want to be heard.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri is recognized.
Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I want to address, very briefly, the
amendment of the Senator from New York. We put too much time and effort
into this without taking just a moment to express my thanks to the
Senator from Connecticut, the Senator from Kentucky, and their staffs
for a lot of work that has gone into this effort. It is with great
pride and much relief to be back on the floor today, we hope,
completing work on election reform.
The 2000 election opened the eyes of many Americans to the flaws and
failures of the election machinery, our voting systems, and how we
determine what a vote is. We learned of hanging chads and inactive
lists. We discovered our military's votes were mishandled and lost and
not counted. We learned of legal voters who were turned away, while
dead voters cast ballots. We discovered that many people voted twice,
while too many people were not counted even once. Finally, that is why
we are here today.
This final compromise bill--and it is a compromise in the truest
sense of the word. I have never seen any more effort to reach a
compromise, to try to accommodate the legitimate concerns on all sides,
than I have seen in this effort. I believe that, while nothing we do is
perfect, we have gone a long way toward meeting those concerns.
The $3.5 billion in this bill provided in funding over the next 5
years should make a significant improvement for States and localities
to improve and update their voting systems. We also provide specific
minimum requirements for the voting systems so that we can be assured
that the machinery meets minimum error rates and the voters are given
the opportunity to correct any errors they have made prior to their
votes being cast.
The bill also provides funding to help ensure that the disabled have
access to the polling place and the voting system is fully accessible
to those with disabilities. Nobody has been a greater champion for
assuring the ability of those with disabilities to vote than the
Senator from Connecticut; his passion for this is unmatched. I believe
and trust that we will see a significant improvement that will be a
great benefit to all of our citizens with disabilities.
A new election administration commission is created to be a
clearinghouse for the latest technologies and improvements. The Senator
from Kentucky worked long and hard on that. We incorporate several
recommendations by the Carter-Ford commission, and particularly the
requirement that States set up a statewide voter registration system.
That is going to help solve a lot of problems, from confused
registration lists that lose voters' registrations to ineligible
voters. It should keep the registration lists more up to date, and it
will eliminate the duplicates and assist voters who move within a
State.
Then the bill also goes on to address one of my key concerns, and
that is the issue of fraud. Much has been said about the issue. Much
more will be said, but as the Senator from Connecticut noted when we
began this long journey 10 months ago, we agreed on the basic
principle--we must make it easier to vote and tougher to cheat. That
ought to be everybody's goal in election reform. I think this bill
meets the test and the conference report will need to meet this simple
test, too.
I have heard some critics--and unfortunately, it has been out there
so long we have generated a backlash. Some of the critics say it is
going to require every voter in America to show a photo identification
before they are allowed to vote each time.
Well, I have been involved in politics for a number of years, so I
know the art of the big deception, as in the belief that the bigger the
deception, the greater the chance you will get away with it. So to give
the public, or anybody who may be watching or listening, a fighting
chance to get the facts--and I hope that somebody in the media is
listening today as well--let me just go through the compromise.
First, as most of you know, in my home State of Missouri, in St.
Louis, we have seen a number of interesting figures registering to vote
recently. There was Albert ``Red'' Villa, Joline Joyce, the mother of
the prosecuting attorney, or circuit attorney in St. Louis, and, of
course, the famous Ritzy Meckler. Each of these people, and dogs,
pulled off their remarkable feat because they were able to register by
mail. Even in St. Louis it would have been hard to believe they would
have gotten on the voter rolls if they registered in person. Red Villa
died 10
[[Page S2473]]
years ago, and Ms. Joyce died slightly more recently than that. Ritzy
Meckler, of course, is a lovable spaniel, a dog, that is registered to
vote. All three of them signed ``their names'' on the registration
rolls.
So to some who say that all we need is a signature, I say that has
been the source of a lot of fraud in St. Louis and, I believe,
elsewhere.
All we say is, if you choose to register by mail, you will need to
provide some proof of identity to an election official at some point in
the process before you vote the first time. Dead people and dogs need
not apply. The proof of identity requirement only applies one time--the
first time--to those who choose to register by mail. What does the
individual need to provide? A photo identification. This will obviously
be the simplest and easiest for many. Student identification, driver's
licenses, and government identification all qualify.
As we know, requiring an identification has become a norm for Amtrak,
airline passengers, buying beer or cigarettes, or to write a check at
the grocery store, or to cash a check.
We recognize that everybody does not have photo identification. So we
created an expansive list of alternatives: A bank statement, a
paycheck, a government check, a transfer payment, a utility bill, or
any other government document that is current and shows the name and
address of the voter.
We have made significant dollars available to States and localities
to use their best efforts to find out, if there are some people who do
not have any of those documents, how they can get them registered. They
can go out and help people who need help who do not have the required
photo identification or an official document with their name and
address on it.
Money is also available to expunge from the list those who are dead,
who have moved, or who do not have any business voting in that State.
We simply do not want the names to be registered by mail and then
voted in an election with no one checking to see if they are a live
human being qualified to vote in that State.
It has always been a simple proposition. We must recognize that vote
fraud cheats all other voters. It is a denial of a basic civil right to
lose your vote because somebody not qualified to vote has cast a vote
that wipes yours out. Those who took time to follow the rules, stand in
line, wait their turn, and then cast their votes should not have to
fear their vote will be diluted or canceled by an illegal vote.
There are those who do not believe vote fraud exists. There was a
political science professor in New York who told us in that great
wisdom that only academics have that vote fraud is a myth:
Stuffing the ballot box happens only in cartoons and old
movies.
Perhaps you would like to talk to three recently indicted individuals
in St. Louis, indicted as a result of fraud prior to the mayoral
primary in St. Louis city. Three people were charged with a combined 17
counts. They cheated by registering dead people and nonexistent people
by mail. I will be happy to show it to my colleagues. I ask unanimous
consent that a news release from the Office of Attorney General
Jennifer M. Joyce be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Office of the St. Louis Circuit Attorney, Mar. 4, 2002]
Circuit Attorney Announces Charges Against Vote Fraud Offenders
St. Louis, Mar. 4.--St. Louis Circuit Attorney Jennifer M.
Joyce announced that her office has charged three individuals
with committing class one election offenses by completing
and, in most instances, signing Missouri Voter Registration
Application cards in the names of others. All of these
charges are related to false voter registration cards
submitted for the March 2001 mayoral primary.
Joyce said that the United States Attorney's Office for the
Eastern District of Missouri, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, the United States Postal Inspector's Office,
the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department and the Circuit
Attorney's Office all collaborated on this investigation that
has culminated in charging three different individuals with a
combined 17 counts.
``As Circuit Attorney and a life-long resident of this
City, I am committed to upholding the integrity of the
election process. The people of this community deserve fair
and clean elections. We will do whatever we can to protect
the voting rights of all citizens of the City of St. Louis,''
Joyce said.
The Circuit Attorney's Office has charged Eliza Julion, 29,
with seven felony counts of voter fraud. More specifically,
the complaint asserts that Eliza Julion completed and signed
voter registration cards in the names of two individuals who
she made-up or manufactured. Further, she also filled out a
voter registration card in the name of another fictitious
person and completed and signed a voter registration card
in the name of another individual, who was in prison at
the time, the complaint asserts. Also, the Circuit
Attorney charges that Eliza Julion completed and signed
two different voter application cards for the same
individual and signed the card belonging to another
individual.
The Circuit Attorney has also charged Michelle Robinson,
32, with nine felony counts of vote fraud. More specifically,
the complaint asserts that she completed and signed nine
voter registration cards in the names of mostly former
elected officials, including some of whom are deceased.
The Circuit Attorney has also charged Paul Julion, 26, with
one count of felony vote fraud. The complaint asserts that
Paul Julion completed and signed a voter registration card in
the name of a fictitious person, a name that he manufactured.
All 17 counts are class one election offenses, which are
felonies. The range of punishment for each offense is up to
five years in jail or a fine between $2,500 and $10,000. If
convicted, Eliza Julion could face a maximum punishment of up
to 35 years in jail or up to $70,000 in fines. If convicted,
Michelle Robinson could face up to 45 years in jail or up to
$90,000 in fines. If convicted, Paul Julion could face up to
5 years in jail or up to $10,000 in fines.
The charges as set forth in the complaints are merely
accusations and each defendant is presumed innocent until,
and unless, proven guilty.
Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this news release will give a small idea of
some of the work that has been done by law enforcement officials.
I also point out the Missouri secretary of state reviewed 1,300
judge-ordered registrations on election day in Missouri. Of those
1,300, 97 percent of them were illegal.
We have set up a provisional voting system that allows the election
authorities, if somebody is not registered and believes they are
registered, to cast a provisional vote. This provisional voting system
should help those who are legitimate voters who registered where the
election authority messed up. It will help make sure their votes are
counted.
Those who try to vote without being properly registered will be
discovered and their vote will not be counted; it will not be placed in
the ballot box.
For those who say vote fraud does not occur, the April 4, 2002,
Houston Chronicle headline reads: ``2,000 Voted Illegally in City
Polling'':
More than 2,000 people voted illegally in the local
November elections in the Houston mayoral runoff in December,
including 712 who cast ballots in city races and don't live
in the city. . . . There could be a major impact in close
elections.
That is my point. We want to make sure the system works for those who
have difficulty getting registered and those who have voted in the past
have an opportunity to vote and those who have voted once do not try to
vote twice.
With the amendment presented by the Senator from New York, I am
afraid it oversimplifies the issue and offers a remedy which will
create far more problems than it solves. She has indicated that 2
million people in each of the last four Presidential elections did not
have their votes counted because of unintentional voter error. From
that, we are to conclude with this fix all those votes might be
counted. The problem is that this 2 million number cited is the
residual vote rate for those elections, meaning those ballots which are
unmarked, spoiled, or where the intent of the voter could not be
determined.
There are people, as I believe the Senator has mentioned, who choose
not to vote in races. The Carter-Ford commission estimates that is
about .77, or almost eight-tenths of 1 percent, who chose not to cast a
vote in a Presidential race. An MIT study says it is about half a
percent. Clearly, it fluctuates from election to election.
This underlying bill takes significant steps to address the problems
coming from machinery, the equipment, in voter errors, and sets a
national standard for error rates. The Commission will assist the
States in identifying the best equipment available.
Standards for notification and voter education, which is very
important, are established, and there is $3.5 billion authorized to
purchase machines that
[[Page S2474]]
will comply with the standards and provide voter education.
The problem we have is that some people just plain make mistakes. If
it is not a voting machine problem or a voting system problem, we know
there are people who just choose not to vote. They may not vote for a
President or they may not vote for other races down the line. If we
establish some kind of standard that says if you do not meet this
standard, then the Justice Department is going to come in and sue you,
you have, unfortunately, created an incentive for election poll workers
to look at every ballot. Ballot secrecy goes out the window because if
you know you are going to get sued and your election is going to be
called off because there were too many errors, the pressure is going to
be on to make sure everybody voted right.
The voting officials may not be so bold as to walk into the polls and
look over the voters' shoulders as they are punching the punchcard or
filling out the ballot, but there is certainly a strong temptation for
them to look at the ballots when they come out and to say: Excuse me,
you made a mistake; you didn't vote here or you voted in too many
places.
Once we do that, once we try to account for a voter error, a human
error, I am afraid we are going down the road of destroying the secrecy
of the ballot and saying that people who are election judges and
election officials are going to have to look at the ballots of each
voter. We will have poll workers reviewing ballots.
Under no circumstances do we want poll workers reviewing ballots
before they are cast, destroying the secrecy and the privacy of the
ballot. To make sure you do not violate the voter error standard, you
would be forced into that position.
We have dealt with bringing down the error rate the best way possible
in this bill--new machines, voter education, which is extremely
important. We are already seeing an increase in mail voting which does
offer a compromise of a secret ballot. But with this amendment, we
could see the end of the secret ballot.
I am afraid it goes the wrong way. I urge my colleagues to agree to a
study to determine how we can improve voter efficiency and
effectiveness, but let us not set a standard that might force poll
workers to reach out and touch somebody's ballot before they put it in
the ballot box.
I thank the Chair, and I particularly thank my colleagues who worked
on this so long and so diligently. I urge all of our colleagues to
support this measure, move it to conference, and get a bill back from
conference that we can send to the President so that in the shortest
possible time, we will have a measure in law that will make it easier
to vote and tougher to cheat.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Cantwell). The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, before the Senator from Missouri
leaves, I wish to thank him for his absolutely indispensable
contribution to this whole process from beginning to end. The Senator
from Missouri is not on the Rules Committee, but he developed an
interest in this issue. His interest and passion is a direct result of
the voter fraud issues in his home State, which he has skillfully
sought to make much more difficult to happen in the future.
The parts of this bill related to fraud are entirely the result of
the tireless efforts of the Senator from Missouri, and I wanted to
express my gratitude to him for his intelligence, tenacity, and
effectiveness in turning this into a bill I can enthusiastically and
wholeheartedly support. I wish to assure him that we are going to try
very hard at the conference to make sure this bill still has the
important features he has worked to have included.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I rise in support of this bill. The
bill we consider today on election reform, I believe, is the most
important legislation we will consider all year. Congress has a
responsibility to ensure every registered American who goes to vote
gets to vote and that every vote cast counts.
There are few concepts more fundamentally American than choosing our
leaders, which means that even in our Nation's Capitol, in this very
seat of democracy, this may truly be the great American bill.
Despite the strength of our democracy, if we do not do a good job
maintaining the actual mechanism that drives it, our voting systems, we
fail the voters and undermine our values, the values our Founding
Fathers fought and died for, as did so many subsequent generations of
Americans. That is why it is so important we pass this legislation.
I thank our chairman, Senator Dodd, for his indefatigable leadership
and his continuing fight for this bill. It can truly be said about
certain legislation that without a single person, it would not have
happened. In this case, Senator Dodd's leadership clearly puts him in
that category.
I also thank Senator McConnell from Kentucky who worked hard on this
bill. Since he and I originally put in a proposal to deal with the core
of the bill, which is funding these new voting systems, he has always
been a pleasure to work with and he has been steadfast. I thank Senator
Bond for his contribution and Senator Wyden for his commitment to
improving the Nation's election system as well.
This bill will make voting easier and more accurate. It allows many
more people to participate in our democratic processes and that is what
this country is all about. As with most bipartisan legislation, which
is the only way we really get anything passed, this bill is a
compromise. There are some things in this bill that, if it were up to
me entirely, I would change, but that is not what the people in our
States sent us to do, to say it is my way or no way.
This bill is a good and fair compromise, and I am proud of it. The
most important result is that, after more than 200 years, we are
finally giving our democracy the resources it needs and the respect it
deserves.
I voted for the first time in 1969 and I used the same type of
machine when I voted in 2001, some 32 years later. Instead of being
faced with deciding between good candidates, voters are faced with a
host of problems ranging from out of date machines and inadequately
maintained registration lists, confusingly designed ballots, and phone
lines that are so busy the voters cannot get through to confirm their
registration status.
In New York, we use these pretty clunky, old voting machines. They
are cumbersome. They take a long time. As I have told my colleagues
before, to see the painful look on the face of someone who is coming
out of the factory, going to vote, waiting in line for an hour, finally
doing their duty and finding they are not on the right list or that the
machine does not work or that it was so confusing they missed an
important part of the ballot, their disappointment has stayed with me
throughout my career, and I am glad we are able to do something about
it.
The fact is, just because we are the oldest democracy in the world
does not mean we have to use the oldest technology in the world. The
problem does not end with machines. In my home State of New York,
November 2000, as I mentioned, people waited in line for hours to vote.
Many voters, those who could not afford to be late for work, had to get
home to the children or go on to a second job and vote in between the
two, ultimately left the polling place without being able to
participate in one of the most critical and closest elections in our
time. Others waited and waited only to be confronted with the cruel
reality that the machine in their precinct was broken or that the
polling place had run out of emergency ballots.
Voting should be accessible, accurate, and speedy in all places, all
of the time. This bill provides the funds and standards to make sure
that is exactly what happens. There are also provisions we have agreed
to that address some of the concerns raised by my and Senator Wyden's
amendment. Most importantly, we have aligned the effective dates of the
photo identification, provisional voting, and computerized statewide
voter registration database requirements. This means that first-time
voters who do not have photo identification will be able to vote
provisionally, and that is really important.
This change also allows us to define first-time voters as people
moving
[[Page S2475]]
from State to State rather than jurisdiction to jurisdiction, which
means that many fewer people will trigger the photo identification
requirement, and this was possible because States with databases will
be able to track voters across jurisdictions.
We have agreed also to allow voters to provide their drivers license
number, at least the last four digits of their Social Security number,
when they register. If these numbers match an existing State record
that confirms the voter's identity, then they are exempted from the
photo identification provisions.
Ultimately, these changes mean many of the people we were worried
about would have been adversely affected by the identification
provision, and they will be OK one way or the other. Is that 100
percent? No, but we cannot let the perfect be the enemy of the good,
especially not when the alternative is allowing our democracy to
sputter along, disappointed voter after disappointed voter.
I strongly urge my colleagues to support the bill. We often have the
opportunity to support legislation that makes things better, and that
is why we are here, but today we have an opportunity to make a little
bit of history, and that is something we will never forget.
I also thank my staff who worked so long and hard on this
legislation.
I yield back my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. DODD. We have a couple more amendments that may be agreed to. In
the meantime, I wish to make a point. While I did not get an
opportunity to do so when he was in the Chamber, I would like to
commend our colleague from Missouri, Senator Bond. I have said this on
numerous occasions, and I will say it again, without Senator Bond's
participation and contribution we would not be on the brink of passing
this bill. He brought a very important issue to the table, one that is
not a part of the House-passed bill, not because they opposed it, they
did not consider it. Had it not been for Senator Bond, I am not sure it
would be in this particular product. So we owe him a very deep sense of
gratitude concerning a very legitimate issue that I think complements
the bill in a very fine way. I will later add further remarks about his
contribution, but I wanted to publicly thank him.
I also commend my dear friend and colleague from New York. Senator
Schumer was, again, a very long and valiant participant in extensive
negotiations on this bill, bringing us to the point we are this
evening. I wish to thank him publicly for his work.
Early on, he and Senator McConnell offered one of the very first
measures to deal with election reform. He immediately saw the need to
do something, as the Senator from Kentucky did. His willingness to back
up and to work with us on a slightly different version is something I
will always be very grateful to him for. His contribution has been
significant.
Mr. SCHUMER. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. DODD. I am happy to yield.
Mr. SCHUMER. I thank the Senator for his kind words. It has been a
pleasure to work with him. I mentioned while he was out of the room, it
is rare to say on an important piece of legislation without a single
person this legislation would not have passed. In the case of the
Senator from Connecticut, that is true. Everyone tips their hat to the
Senator for the great job he has done.
I also mentioned the Senator from Kentucky has been steadfast and
principled in this effort. We didn't always agree on exactly what was
the right thing to do, but he wanted to get this bill done and he
played a valuable part.
I thank both the Senator from Connecticut and the Senator from
Kentucky. They are in large part responsible for the fine improvement
in voting we will have when this bill becomes law.
Mr. McCONNELL. If I could speak briefly, one of the wonderful things
that happen in putting together legislation: You get to know people
better. I had not known the Senator from New York very well. He came to
the Senate in the beginning of 1999. I enjoyed getting to know him in
the process. I enjoyed working with him.
This legislation is a classic example, with Senator Dodd's
leadership, and Senator Torricelli was deeply involved; the five of us
had a bonding experience here. We managed to come together on a very
worthwhile piece of legislation which I anticipate will pass tomorrow
by a very large margin, if not unanimously.
I thank the Senator from New York for his friendship and on this
bill.
Mr. DODD. I will have more kind comments about my friend from
Kentucky, but I will wait until tomorrow so we can clean up some of the
amendments.
Amendment No. 3111
Mr. McCONNELL. I have an amendment by Senator Grassley which I send
to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration. It is cleared on
both sides.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection the clerk will report.
The assistant bill clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McCONNELL], for Mr.
Grassley, proposes an amendment numbered 3111.
Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment
be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To permit States to coordinate the computerized statewide
voter registration list with Federal records relating to death and
identity)
On page 18, between lines 7 and 8, insert the following:
(4) Interaction with federal information.--
(A) Access to federal information.--
(i) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the Commissioner of Social Security shall provide, upon
request from a State or locality maintaining a computerized
centralized list implemented under paragraph (1), only such
information as is necessary to determine the eligibility of
an individual to vote in such State or locality under the law
of the State. Any State or locality that receives information
under this clause may only share such information with
election officials.
(ii) Procedure.--The information under clause (i) shall be
provided in such place and such manner as the Commissioner
determines appropriate to protect and prevent the misuse of
information.
(B) Applicable information.--For purposes of this
subsection, the term ``applicable information'' means
information regarding whether--
(i) the name and social security number of an individual
provided to the Commissioner match the information contained
in the Commissioner's records; and
(ii) such individual is shown on the records of the
Commissioner as being deceased.
(C) Exception.--Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to any
request for a record of an individual if the Commissioner
determines there are exceptional circumstances warranting an
exception (such as safety of the individual or interference
with an investigation).
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, there is a very serious issue concerning
the proper functioning of elections--the integrity of voter lists.
All eligible voters should be given every opportunity to vote.
In fact, much of this bill is aimed at doing just that.
However, without integrity in our voting lists, the door is wide open
to many kinds of voting irregularities.
Every ineligible vote denigrates the efforts of every eligible voter
to cause participatory democracy to work.
When votes are cast by individuals who are not legally entitled to
vote, whether it be because they are using a false identity or because
they are dead, the value of all properly cast votes is diminished.
We have all heard reports of people who are registered to vote and
should not be or who voted illegally.
Senator Bond has already mentioned during the debate on this bill an
investigation by the Missouri secretary of state which determined that,
in the 2000 election, votes were cast in the St. Louis area by 14 dead
people.
Senator Bond has also told us about troubling instances in St. Louis
where large numbers of voter registration forms were submitted to
election officials using false identities.
In Georgia, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution conducted a study
comparing voting records and death records from the state Department of
Human Resources and the Social Security Administration.
The investigation revealed that 5,412 dead people voted over the past
20 years and that the number of registered dead voters has increased
dramatically in recent years.
[[Page S2476]]
As of November 2000, 15,000 dead people remained on the active voting
rolls in Georgia.
Sometimes we hear these anecdotes about instances of voter fraud and
they take on the character of a cynical joke, but I don't think it is
very funny.
Such cases erode public confidence in the electoral process and are
an affront to all those who cast votes legally.
The bill before us already takes an important step in ensuring the
integrity of States' voter rolls by providing for interactive,
computerized, statewide voter registration lists.
This will enable States to check for duplicates and coordinate with
State agencies to verify that registered voters are legally able to
vote under State law.
However, more can and should be done.
My amendment would give States a much needed tool to check the
accuracy of their voter roles against information possessed by the
Social Security Administration.
Specifically, my amendment allows a State to coordinate its statewide
voter registration list with social security records to check identity,
and to see if a voter has died.
The commissioner of Social Security would be required to provide,
upon request from a State, applicable information for the purpose of
determining the eligibility of an individual to vote.
This amendment would not require States to undertake any action nor
would it affect State laws governing eligibility of individuals to
vote.
It simply gives the States a valuable tool in their efforts to
maintain clean and accurate lists of eligible voters.
The State decides when and whether to use this tool.
Over the last decade, it has become increasingly easy for people to
register and vote due in large part to the National Voter Registration
Act of 1993, also called the motor voter law.
This trend has increased voter registration across the board,
including registrations by individuals who are not eligible to vote.
Along with the relaxation of voter registration requirements comes
the responsibility to provide for safeguards to preserve the integrity
of the voter rolls.
I can think of no reason why individuals who are not eligible to vote
should be allowed to remain untouched on State voter lists.
A State can decide to do that.
But, today, if States want to be extra careful in preserving the
integrity of their voter lists, they lack some very important
information.
Give them the tools!
This amendment is just one more way that we can help the States
maintain the most accurate, reliable list possible of eligible voters.
This is a commonsense, good government reform and I would urge my
colleagues to join me in this effort.
Mr. McCONNELL. This amendment has been cleared on both sides.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 3111) was agreed to.
Mr. DODD. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. DODD. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Amendment No. 3112
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I send an amendment, which has been
cleared, by Senator Bob Smith to the desk and ask for its immediate
consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McCONNELL], for Mr. SMITH of
New Hampshire, proposes an amendment numbered 3112.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To provide for a study into the broadcasting of false
election information)
At the appropriate place, add the following:
SEC. . BROADCASTING FALSE ELECTION INFORMATION.
In carrying out its duty under section 303(a)(1)(G), the
Commission, within 6 months after its establishment shall
provide a detailed report to the Congress on issues regarding
the broadcasting or transmitting by cable of federal election
results including broadcasting practices that may result in
the broadcast of false information concerning the location or
time of operation of a polling place.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is
on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 3112) was agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. DODD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Amendment No. 3113
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I have another amendment that has
been cleared by Senator Craig Thomas of Wyoming. I send it to the desk
and ask for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McCONNELL], for Mr. Thomas,
proposes an amendment numbered 3113.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that reading
of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate regarding changes made to
the electoral process and how such changes impact States)
At the end, add the following:
SEC. ____. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING CHANGES MADE TO THE
ELECTORAL PROCESS AND HOW SUCH CHANGES IMPACT
STATES.
It is the sense of the Senate that--
(1) the provisions of this Act, shall not prohibit States
to use curbside voting as a last resort to satisfy the voter
accessibility requirements under section 101(a)(3);
(2) the provisions of this Act, permit States--
(A) to use Federal funds to purchase new voting machines;
and
(B) to elect to retrofit existing voting machines in lieu
of purchasing new machines to meet the voting machine
accessibility requirements under section 101(a)(3);
(3) nothing in this Act requires States to replace existing
voting machines;
(4) nothing under section 10(a) of this Act specifically
requires States to install wheelchair ramps or pave parking
lots at each polling location if the State otherwise provides
for the accessibility needs of individuals with disabilities;
and
(5) the Election Administration Commission, the Attorney
General, and the Architectural and Transportation Barriers
Compliance Board should the differences that exist between
urban and rural areas with respect to the administration of
Federal elections under this Act.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, without
objection the amendment is agreed to.
The amendment (No. 3113) was agreed to.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. DODD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
new technologies
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise in support of this measure and to
thank my colleagues for their hard work on this bill that will make
voting in many States easier and more accurate. Before we pass this
legislation, I would like to address one additional point. In drafting
legislation, it is often very difficult to look to the future and
anticipate the impact that legislation will have on new technologies.
To truly reform the Federal election process, this legislation must
remedy the infirmities of the present system. However, it also must be
forward-looking in its approach. It should welcome the implementation
of new election technologies. The flexibility of this legislation to
accommodate innovation will be the ultimate strength of Federal
election reform.
I firmly believe that voting by computer, whether by internet or some
other remote electronic system, is likely to happen in many states in
the near future. In fact, Arizona has already held a party caucus in
which voters were permitted to vote over the
[[Page S2477]]
internet. At the same time, I believe that the security concerns are
such that most states, mine included, are not yet ready to provide this
option to voters.
However, in the interests of looking to the future, I would like to
seek clarification from the chairman of the Rules Committee about how
this legislation would affect internet or other forms of remote
electronic voting.
Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, is it the Chairman's understanding that
the bill as it is currently written would not prevent States from
offering voters the option of voting on by the Internet, so long as the
State could show that the internet voting system complied with the
security protocol standards written by the new Election Administration
Commission, and that the voting system also complied with the
requirements of the legislation on accessibility for the disabled,
providing an audit trail of ballots, and by providing voters a means to
make certain they had not made a mistake?
Mr. DODD. Senator Cantwell, I agree with you that very serious
concerns remain about voting by internet. As you know, this legislation
specifically requests that the new organization, the Election
Administration Commission, study internet voting. I am looking forward
to seeing what it learns. However, I hope very much that states will
think very carefully before moving to internet voting, and will make
sure that the security concerns are fully addressed.
That said, the Senator is correct that nothing is this bill prohibits
states from implementing voting on a remote electronic system like the
internet, as long as the system is certified by the new Election
Administration Commission, and complies with the other standards in the
legislation.
I agree with the Senator that it is important to welcome the
development of new election technologies and it was my intent, and my
cosponsors' intent to provide the states as much flexibility as
possible to accommodate innovation while still implementing necessary
minimum standards that will ensure that all our citizens' right to vote
is protected.
Ms. CANTWELL. I agree that it is very important that any voting
system, particularly an electronic voting system have very good
security. However, I believe that it is likely that in the near future
we will in fact have the necessary security, the necessary assurances
of secrecy, and of voter authentication, to make internet voting
workable and I am pleased that this bill leaves the decision about
moving forward with internet voting up to the individual States.
I appreciate all the Chairman's efforts on this legislation, and I
agree that this bill is drafted in a manner that will not limit the
development and implementation of new election technologies so long as
the new technologies satisfy security protocols and meet the
requirements of the minimum standards. I also hope that this
legislation will in fact spur the development of new election
technologies that are more voter friendly and more cost efficient.
Mr. DODD. Madam President, I thank my colleague from Kentucky. I
thank his staff.
As I understand it, we will frame this with the two leaders' consent.
We will have a period of maybe 20 or 30 minutes divided equally between
my friend from Kentucky and I to make any final comments on the bill,
and then there would be three votes: The amendment by Senator Roberts
of Kansas, Senator Clinton of New York, and final passage. All other
amendments have been dealt with. We have accepted all of them here with
the modifications that staffs have worked out this evening.
We can report to our leaders that we are down to two amendments and
final passage, which is what we projected and promised would be the
case if we could get the job done.
With that, I am unclear whether there is going to be a unanimous
consent request on the time. In any event, we will take care of that.
I thank my friend from Kentucky and his staff. Of course, I thank my
staff as well for working very hard tonight and the staffs of the
respective Senators that worked out these agreements and made it
possible to accept these remaining amendments. I look forward to final
passage tomorrow.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I echo the remarks of the Senator
from Connecticut. We will save our pats on each other's backs for
tomorrow. I thank him for his great work and we will see everyone in
the morning.
I yield the floor.
Mr. DODD. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Schumer). The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________