[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 18]
[Senate]
[Pages 26059-26062]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



           MODERNIZING VOTING PROCEDURES IN FEDERAL ELECTIONS

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition to introduce 
legislation which would seek to modernize voting procedures throughout 
the United States in Federal elections. I do not intend to become 
involved in the current controversies but instead have been considering 
where we go from here in order to try to prevent the kind of concerns 
and problems which we have at the present time.
  In Pennsylvania, I have had considerable comment from my constituents 
about the issue as to, in the electronic age, with computers available 
and with electronic devices available why do we have some sections of 
the country voting by paper ballot and why do we have a great variety 
of election procedures in voting, so that there is not uniformity and 
there is not a prompt count.
  Looking at that issue, it seems to me that we can do much better on 
how we vote in Federal elections. The thought on my mind is Congress 
should address this issue at least as to Federal elections, leaving the 
matters of State and local elections to State officials under our 
Federalist concepts.
  It is not really practical for someone to lay out an entire bill with 
the procedures to implement these objectives, but it seems to me--and I 
have been talking to some of my colleagues about it, and there are a 
number of Senators who are thinking in the same direction--that it will 
be useful to establish a commission which would take up the question of 
how we have election procedures which take advantage of computers and 
electronics so that votes may be tabulated accurately and promptly, and 
not have the kinds of issues which arose in our election on November 7.
  I do, therefore, submit, Mr. President, the structure of a bill to 
establish a commission for the comprehensive study of voting procedures 
for Federal elections, to take a look at not only Federal elections but 
State and local elections as well, but with the purpose of finding a 
way to have accurate reporting, electronic reporting, and speedy 
reporting.
  This bill is not in concrete. I am now soliciting cosponsors. I think 
we will have other cosponsors shortly. Since we have an abbreviated 
session today, with only a limited amount of time, I am introducing the 
bill at this time.
  Mr. President, I will make just a comment or two about the electoral 
college.
  As we have moved ahead with the concerns under the current contest 
between Governor Bush and Vice President Gore, I have found many of my 
constituents--and have noted comments in the media across the country--
who are surprised about the way the electoral college works.
  Illustratively, in my State of Pennsylvania, with 23 electoral votes, 
and Vice President Gore having received 51 percent of the vote and 
Governor Bush having received 47 percent, that Vice President Gore got 
all 23 of Pennsylvania's electoral votes.
  In discussions I have found--candidly, a surprise to me--a fair 
amount of concern among my constituents about changing the electoral 
college. There is some confusion that any change in the electoral 
college may have some impact on the current contest between Governor 
Bush and Vice President Gore, which, of course, is not the case. This 
current election is going to be determined under the existing rules of 
the electoral college as it now stands. It seems to me that 
consideration ought to be given to a modification.
  One approach would be to go to the popular election of a President. 
That appears to be unrealistic because there are so many smaller States 
which have only one Member of the House, two Senators, so they get 
three electoral votes. On a proportionate basis, they would be entitled 
to a 1-435th proportion in relation to the House, there being 435 
Members of the House, but they have a 3-535th proportion, taking the 
House's 435 Members and the Senate's 100 Members. Since it takes a two-
thirds vote to pass a constitutional amendment in the Congress, and 
ratification by three-fourths of the States, I think it is unrealistic 
to look to the popular election of a President.
  But there is an alternative way where it might be achieved; that is, 
with a proportional representation. S.J. Res. 51 was introduced in the 
96th Congress by Senator Cannon, cosponsored by Senators Thurmond, 
Goldwater, Harry Byrd and Talmadge, which provided for a constitutional 
amendment for proportional representation, which might be the way to 
go.
  Illustratively, in a State such as Pennsylvania, with 23 electoral 
votes, and a vote split of 51 percent and 47 percent, it might be 
divided as 12 votes for Vice President Gore and 11 votes for Governor 
Bush. I think this is going to require further study.
  I do think it is plain that the purpose of having the electoral 
college, as reflected in the Federalist Papers, was to provide a buffer 
between the common voter, who was thought at that time not to be 
sufficiently informed to directly elect a President. That, of course, 
was changed when we had a constitutional amendment providing for the 
direct election of Senators.
  In the original Constitution, Senators were elected by the State 
legislatures, so that the common man did not vote directly for a 
Senator. But that has been changed as we have come to understand that 
in modern times every voter has a full capacity to make the direct 
election of an elected official with Senators, and I think on the same 
analogy to the President as well. But because of the extra leverage for 
the smaller States, which I do not contest, the direct election is not 
realistic. But perhaps a proportional election through the electoral 
college might be appropriate, with the smaller States having the 
additional advantage of having two electors, accounting for their two 
Senators. I think that is going to require further study. Again, I have 
been discussing that with my colleagues.
  I do think people in this country want to know what our plans are for 
the future. I also think there ought to be an awareness that many of us 
in the Congress are considering whether the electoral college should 
stand as it now is or whether it should be changed.
  An intermediate ground may be this proportional voting of the 
electoral college, as reflected in S.J. Res. 51 from the 96th Congress. 
I believe there is no doubt that we need to modernize election 
procedures, and that the way to go would be a five-person commission 
with appointments made by the President, the majority leader of the 
Senate, the minority leader of the Senate,

[[Page 26060]]

the Speaker of the House, and the minority leader of the House. These 
matters ought to be subject to consideration to try to eliminate some 
of the problems which the country now faces.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 3269

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Commission on the 
     Comprehensive Study of Voting Procedures Act of 2000''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) Americans are increasingly concerned about current 
     voting procedures;
       (2) Americans are increasingly concerned about the speed 
     and timeliness of vote counts;
       (3) Americans are increasingly concerned about the accuracy 
     of vote counts;
       (4) Americans are increasingly concerned about the security 
     of voting procedures;
       (5) the shift in the United States is to the increasing use 
     of technology which calls for a reassessment of the use of 
     standardized technology for Federal elections; and
       (6) there is a need for Congress to establish a method for 
     standardizing voting procedures in order to ensure the 
     integrity of Federal elections.

     SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMISSION.

       There is established the Commission on the Comprehensive 
     Study of Voting Procedures (in this Act referred to as the 
     ``Commission'').

     SEC. 4. DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION.

       (a) Study.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Commission shall complete a 
     thorough study of all issues relating to voting procedures in 
     Federal, State, and local elections, including the following:
       (1) Voting procedures in Federal, State, and local 
     government elections.
       (2) Voting procedures that represent the best practices in 
     Federal, State, and local government elections.
       (3) Legislation and regulatory efforts that affect voting 
     procedures issues.
       (4) The implementation of standardized voting procedures, 
     including standardized technology, for Federal, State, and 
     local government elections.
       (5) The speed and timeliness of vote counts in Federal, 
     State and local elections.
       (6) The accuracy of vote counts in Federal, State and local 
     elections.
       (7) The security of voting procedures in Federal, State and 
     local elections.
       (b) Recommendations.--The Commission shall develop 
     recommendations on the matters studied under subsection (a).
       (c) Reports.--
       (1) Final report.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     expiration of the period referred to in subsection (a), the 
     Commission shall submit a report, that has been approved by a 
     majority of the members of the Commission, to the President 
     and Congress which shall contain a detailed statement of the 
     findings and conclusions of the Commission, together with its 
     recommendations for such legislation and administrative 
     actions as it considers appropriate.
       (2) Interim reports.--The Commission may submit to the 
     President and Congress any interim reports that are approved 
     by a majority of the members of the Commission.
       (3) Additional reports.--The Commission may, together with 
     the report submitted under paragraph (1), submit additional 
     reports that contain any dissenting or minority opinions of 
     the members of the Commission.

     SEC. 5. MEMBERSHIP.

       (a) Number and Appointment.--The Commission shall be 
     composed of 5 members of whom--
       (1) 1 shall be appointed by the President;
       (2) 1 shall be appointed by the majority leader of the 
     Senate;
       (3) 1 shall be appointed by the minority leader of the 
     Senate;
       (4) 1 shall be appointed by the Speaker of the House of 
     Representatives; and
       (5) 1 shall be appointed by the minority leader of the 
     House of Representatives.
       (b) Date of Appointment.--The appointments of the members 
     of the Commission shall be made not later than 30 days after 
     the date of enactment of this Act.
       (c) Terms.--Each member of the Commission shall be 
     appointed for the life of the Commission.
       (d) Vacancies.--A vacancy in the Commission shall not 
     affect its powers, but shall be filled in the same manner in 
     which the original appointment was made.
       (e) Meetings.--
       (1) In general.--The Commission shall meet at the call of 
     the Chairperson or a majority if its members.
       (2) Initial meeting.--Not later than 30 days after the date 
     on which all members of the Commission have been appointed, 
     the Commission shall hold its first meeting.
       (f) Quorum.--A majority of the members of the Commission 
     shall constitute a quorum, but a lesser number of members may 
     hold hearings.
       (g) Chairperson and Vice Chairperson.--The Commission shall 
     select a Chairperson and Vice Chairperson from among its 
     members.

     SEC. 6. POWERS OF THE COMMISSION.

       (a) Hearings and Sessions.--The Commission may hold such 
     hearings for the purpose of carrying out this Act, sit and 
     act at such times and places, take such testimony, and 
     receive such evidence as the Commission considers advisable 
     to carry out this Act. The Commission may administer oaths 
     and affirmations to witnesses appearing before the 
     Commission.
       (b) Information From Federal Agencies.--The Commission may 
     secure directly from any Federal department or agency such 
     information as the Commission considers necessary to carry 
     out this Act. Upon request of the Chairperson of the 
     Commission, the head of such department or agency shall 
     furnish such information to the Commission.
       (c) Website.--For purposes of conducting the study under 
     section 4(a), the Commission shall establish a website to 
     facilitate public comment and participation.
       (d) Postal Services.--The Commission may use the United 
     States mails in the same manner and under the same conditions 
     as other departments and agencies of the Federal Government.
       (e) Administrative Support Services.--Upon the request of 
     the Chairperson of the Commission, the Administrator of the 
     General Services Administration shall provide to the 
     Commission, on a reimbursable basis, the administrative 
     support services that are necessary to enable the Commission 
     to carry out its duties under this Act.
       (f) Contracts.--The Commission may contract with and 
     compensate persons and Federal agencies for supplies and 
     services without regard to section 3709 of the Revised 
     Statutes (42 U.S.C. 5).
       (g) Gifts and Donations.--The Commission may accept, use, 
     and dispose of gifts or donations of services or property to 
     carry out this Act.

     SEC. 7. COMMISSION PERSONNEL MATTERS.

       (a) Compensation of Members.--Each member of the Commission 
     who is not an officer or employee of the Federal Government 
     shall be compensated at a rate equal to the daily equivalent 
     of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for level IV of 
     the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5, United 
     States Code, for each day (including travel time) during 
     which such member is engaged in the performance of the duties 
     of the Commission. All members of the Commission who are 
     officers or employees of the United States shall serve 
     without compensation in addition to that received for their 
     services as officers or employees of the United States.
       (b) Travel Expenses.--The members of the Commission shall 
     be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of 
     subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies 
     under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States 
     Code, while away from their homes or regular places of 
     business in the performance of services for the Commission.
       (c) Staff.--
       (1) In general.--The Chairperson of the Commission may, 
     without regard to the civil service laws and regulations, 
     appoint and terminate an executive director and such other 
     additional personnel as may be necessary to enable the 
     Commission to perform its duties. The employment of an 
     executive director shall be subject to confirmation by the 
     Commission.
       (2) Compensation.--The Chairperson of the Commission may 
     fix the compensation of the executive director and other 
     personnel without regard to chapter 51 and subchapter III of 
     chapter 53 of title 5, United States Code, relating to 
     classification of positions and General Schedule pay rates, 
     except that the rate of pay for the executive director and 
     other personnel may not exceed the rate payable for level V 
     of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of such title.
       (d) Detail of Government Employees.--Any Federal Government 
     employee may be detailed to the Commission without 
     reimbursement, and such detail shall be without interruption 
     or loss of civil service status or privilege.
       (e) Procurement of Temporary and Intermittent Services.--
     The Chairperson of the Commission may procure temporary and 
     intermittent services under section 3109(b) of title 5, 
     United States Code, at rates for individuals which do not 
     exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay 
     prescribed for level V of the Executive Schedule under 
     section 5316 of such title.

     SEC. 8. LIMITATION ON CONTRACTING AUTHORITY.

       Any new contracting authority provided for in this Act 
     shall be effective only to the extent, or in the amounts, 
     provided for in advance in appropriations Acts.

     SEC. 9. TERMINATION OF THE COMMISSION.

       The Commission shall terminate 30 days after the date on 
     which the Commission submits its report under section 4.

     SEC. 10. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

       Nothing in this Act shall be construed to prohibit the 
     enactment of an Act with respect to voting procedures during 
     the period

[[Page 26061]]

     in which the Commission is carrying out its duties under this 
     Act.

     SEC. 11. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     such sums as may be necessary to the Commission to carry out 
     this Act.
       (b) Availability.--Any sums appropriated under the 
     authorization contained in this section shall remain 
     available, without fiscal year limitation, until expended.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who seeks recognition?
  The Chair recognizes the Senator from Iowa.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I understand we are in morning business; 
and we can speak for up to how long?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Up to 5 minutes, with each side controlling 10 
minutes total.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I commend and congratulate my friend and 
colleague from Pennsylvania for introducing this legislation to set up 
a commission. I think it is very timely.
  I would just say to my friend from Pennsylvania, it seems that one of 
the things I have picked up in traveling around Iowa is that people are 
deeply concerned and somewhat unnerved by the fact that we have all 
these different types of voting machines around the United States. We 
are a mobile society. We move a lot. We go from one jurisdiction to 
another. You can go from one county to another and have a completely 
different system of voting on machines. Plus, some of these are really 
outdated. We have technology today that really can ensure that your 
vote is as you want it and that there are no mistakes made unless you 
intentionally want to do something such as that. We just have not 
adopted that new technology.
  I think the proper course would be to set up some type of commission, 
give them the proper funding, and make sure it is a bipartisan 
commission that would be evenly divided, that could go out and look at 
these things and perhaps report back to Congress in due time. I 
understand the Senator said he wanted 1 year to report back, if I am 
not mistaken.
  Mr. SPECTER. If the distinguished Senator will yield.
  Mr. HARKIN. I yield.
  Mr. SPECTER. The legislation provides that the commission would have 
1 year to complete a study and then 6 additional months to file a 
report. It is structured to be bipartisan, with the leadership of the 
House and Senate each having one appointee and the President having a 
fifth appointee, so the bipartisanship would be assured.
  If I may add, it is well known the Senator from Iowa and I worked 
very closely together on the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human 
Services, and Education. We just had a brief informal discussion, so I 
may have picked up a cosponsor here before 12:30.
  Mr. HARKIN. I think you might. In fact, in my comments I was going to 
talk about that. Obviously, we are thinking along the same lines. I 
really do believe there ought to be more uniformity, especially in 
national elections, on the type of equipment that is used. I must 
admit, being from Iowa, we don't use punch cards. That went out years 
ago. I was quite surprised some States were still using punch cards. 
Really, they are open to all kinds of problems. Some States still use 
the old lever, the old hand-cranked machines.
  I don't know; does the Senator know how many different types of 
voting machines are used in the United States today?
  Mr. SPECTER. If the Senator will yield, I do not. There are even 
different kinds of machines used in Pennsylvania, and there are still 
many paper ballots which are being used. It is astounding not to have 
rapid, accurate results on election night, with computers being what 
they are and the possibilities of electronics. This may be a matter on 
which the Federal Government will have to do some financing. The study 
ought to be made. Congress ought to consider it and try to solve at 
least a big part of this problem.
  Mr. HARKIN. I thank the Senator for his leadership on this issue.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the remainder of the 
Democratic time be allotted to the Senator from Iowa.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. HARKIN. I thank the Senator from Nevada.
  I note many Americans have expressed concern about the time it is 
taking to determine whom the American people elected as President last 
Tuesday. We just came out of a meeting. A bunch of reporters stopped me 
just off the floor, talking to me about the crisis and shouldn't we 
have to get this resolved. I said: Wait a minute, there is no crisis in 
this country right now. Frankly, I am heartened to see that most 
Americans' first priority is to ensure the votes are counted with 
precision, accuracy, and fairness. The American people know how 
important is one of the bedrocks of our great democracy, the idea no 
matter how rich or poor, powerful or weak, no matter what race, creed, 
or sex, the vote of every American counts equally: One person, one 
vote.
  We can all agree this Presidential election is one of the closest in 
our Nation's history. Now it appears that Vice President Al Gore has 
won the popular vote. He currently leads by about 223,000 votes. He 
also, right now, is ahead in the electoral college, but that electoral 
college outcome is much less clear. At this point, whichever candidate 
wins Florida probably wins the Presidency, and right now, according to 
the latest reports, only 388 votes separate the two candidates. To put 
it in context, that is .0067 percent of the votes in Florida.
  Frankly, I think we can all agree the spirit of ``whatever it takes 
to win and to heck with the will of the voters'' has no place in 
American politics. So I was pleased to see the initial polling shows 
that these efforts have failed. According to a recent Newsweek poll, 72 
percent of American adults believe that making certain the count is 
fair and accurate is more important than rushing to judgment to get 
matters resolved quickly.
  Yes, democracy is slow. Yes, democracy takes time. But it is worth 
it, and the American people understand that. There is no crisis. We 
should take our time, and we should determine accurately what the will 
of the voters really is.
  Much has been said of the hand counting of ballots in Florida, as if 
that were something strange and new. We do hand counting of ballots all 
the time for sheriff, for local county commissioner--all the time. This 
is done at every election in the United States, Federal and State and 
local, when it is very close. Why is the office of President less 
important than local sheriff? It seems to me if hand counting of a 
ballot is important for the local sheriff's race, it is equally 
important, even more important, for the highest office of the land.
  It has been said that machines are neither Democratic nor Republican. 
That is true. But let's keep in mind, the only reason we use voting 
machines in this country is, No. 1, it is cheaper and, No. 2, it is 
quicker. Still, the most accurate way to determine each person's vote 
is to have that person walk into a voting place, give each a paper 
ballot, and have each go in there and mark the boxes with an x, fold 
the ballot, step out, and put it in a box. Then when the polls close, a 
committee looks at these ballots and counts each one. That is clearly 
the most accurate way of counting votes.
  Why don't we do that in America? Obviously, you would not know the 
outcome of elections for months afterwards because it would take that 
long to hand count all the ballots. Second, it would be prohibitively 
expensive. But the idea that somehow machines are more accurate than 
human counts is just nonsensical. It is just not true. The human count 
is still the most accurate.
  When the votes are really close and when the office is at stake 
because of the closeness of the votes--.0067 percent of the votes in 
Florida, as I stand here--it is incumbent upon us to do what we would 
do in a local sheriff's race or supervisor's race, and that is to hand 
count these ballots.
  Again, having said that, I will have more to say about it later on 
this afternoon. I see the hour is 12:30 so the time has come for our 
recess. We will

[[Page 26062]]

be back in at 2:15. At that time, I want to explore a little further 
the idea of having a standardized procedure for standardized voting 
machines for the entire country, one on which people can rely no matter 
where they live. People move all the time. They should not have to be 
confronted with different voting machines.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be listed as a cosponsor of 
the legislation just introduced by Senator Specter of Pennsylvania.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. HARKIN. Has the hour of 12:30 arrived, Mr. President?
  Mr. SPECTER. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. I think the resolution we have been waiting 
for has arrived.
  Mr. HARKIN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry: I understand that 
the Senate will reconvene at 2:15.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the 
Senate reconvenes at 2:15 I be recognized for up to 15 minutes to 
finish my statement.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. I think we have a previous consent agreement 
that allows for each of the leaders to present a list of those who wish 
to speak.
  Mr. HARKIN. I did not hear the President.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. I guess it is not an actual unanimous consent 
request.
  Is there objection to the request? Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, 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. SPECTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I had asked for a quorum call for just a 
moment so that staff could complete certain paperwork. So it may be 
understood why I asked for the quorum call and asked that it be 
rescinded so promptly. On behalf of our distinguished majority leader, 
I have been asked to make this unanimous consent request.

                          ____________________