Testimony before the Senate Governmental
Affairs Committee
Federal Election Practices and Procedures, Part I
Presented by The Honorable John T. Willis
Secretary of State, State of Maryland
May 3, 2001
Mr. Chairman, Senator Lieberman, members of the Senate
Governmental Affairs Committee, thank you for the invitation to
appear before you to discuss the most important relationship
under our constitutional structure of government – the
relationship between individual citizens and their
representatives. In Federalist Paper No. 22, Alexander
Hamilton closed with the observation:
"The fabric of American empire ought to
rest on the solid basis of THE CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE. The
streams of national power ought to flow immediately from that
pure, original foundation of all legitimate authority."
The 2000 presidential election highlighted weaknesses in the
election process which threaten the purity of the flow in the
political stream from the people to their governmental leaders.
It is, therefore, not only appropriate, but also imperative,
that this Senate Committee, and other legislative bodies at all
levels of government, take necessary, meaningful, and immediate
action to guard against further deterioration in the quality of
the relationship between citizens and their government.
The right to vote is the essence and foundation of the
constitutional framework of our federal and state governments in
the United States. The recognition of the sanctity and power of
the right to vote requires that its exercise not be diminished
or impaired. Accordingly, it is mandatory that all possible
steps be taken to guarantee that every eligible citizen in the
United States has the unfettered opportunity to vote and that
the mechanics of voting and election procedures facilitate –
not frustrate – the free exercise of the right to vote.
The conduct of elections is a complex enterprise. In the 2000
presidential election, more than 100 million voters cast ballots
on over 700,000 voting machines in over 200,000 polling places
throughout the country that were managed by approximately 22,000
election officials and 1.4 million part-time election workers.
On election day, 1,940,089 Marylanders voted in 1,666 precincts
at 1,459 polling places throughout the State, and 96,366
absentee ballots were counted within several days thereafter.
Hundreds of state and county election officials, along with over
17,000 election judges stationed at the polling places, were
responsible for the administration of the recent election in
Maryland.
Despite the size and scope of election activity, and the
important consequences of elections for citizens, the
infrastructure for the administration of elections lags well
behind the support systems for routine personal, commercial,
governmental and social interaction in our nation and respective
states. Billions of transactions utilizing modern technology are
conducted every day by U.S. citizens with a high degree of
confidence and user satisfaction. Citizen-voters should have the
same level of confidence and satisfaction in the accuracy and
capability of the systems and equipment used to exercise the
most fundamental right – the right to vote. The
technologies used for obtaining money at the ATM, pumping gas at
the neighborhood service station, making airplane reservations,
or checking out of the supermarket should be available for
exercising the most important and fundamental right in our
country.
Elections in this country should be administered by
comprehensive election management systems which would provide
electronic linkage through all phases of election administration
– from voter registration before the election to the voting
machines in polling places on election day and from the initial
tabulation of results to the official certification of the
election by the appropriate reviewing entity. Assisted by
adequate resources and advanced technology, a comprehensive
election management system can ensure accurate election outcomes
and enhance public confidence in the election process.
A central component of the current election process is voter
registration which the U.S. Congress has long recognized in the
passage of landmark legislation such as the 1965 Voting Rights
Act, as amended, the 1984 Voting Accessibility for the Elderly
and Handicapped Act, the 1986 Uniformed and Overseas Citizens
Absentee Voting Act, and the 1993 National Voter Registration
Act (the "Motor Voter" Act). Modern technology can be
employed to ensure compliance with these federal laws as well as
make voter registration easier and more convenient for the
citizen-voter. On-line access to voter registration information
and applications, expanded opportunity to register at schools,
government offices and public places, and electronic transfer of
registration between jurisdictions can be securely accomplished.
Election administrators can also benefit from greater use of
technology in the voter registration process with improved
databases, verification of information with non-election
administrative agencies, and the sharing of information across
jurisdictional lines.
For example, the State of Maryland began constructing in 1998
a statewide voter registration system as part of its
comprehensive election management system. It is expected that
the system will be functional by December 2001 and will allow
real-time access to voter registration rolls by county and state
election officials. This capability will ensure that a voter is
not registered in more than one jurisdiction, interface with
other governmental agencies in Maryland (e.g., the Motor
Vehicle Administration and the court system), and enable
Maryland to cross reference its voter registration database with
our neighboring states. With additional resources, Maryland
envisions having a computer in each polling place with access to
the statewide voter registration system to ensure that the voter
is at the correct polling place and to verify the signature on
the voter authority card with the signature on the voter
registration application.
The National Voter Registration Act ("NVRA") was
enacted to promote voter participation and eliminate obstacles
to voter registration. In response to concerns about Maryland’s
implementation of the National Voter Registration Act for the
1996 presidential election cycle, and to develop strategies and
techniques to ensure NVRA compliance, Maryland Governor Parris
N. Glendening established the Interdepartmental Working Group on
NVRA Implementation comprised of representatives from the state
agencies designated as voter registration agencies. The purpose
of the group, which continues to meet on a regular basis, is to
enhance access of voter registration information and forms, to
develop methods for increased voter registration, and to
implement "best practices" used by other states in
implementing the NVRA. In the recent election cycle, voter
registration was promoted by the NVRA mandated agencies in both
internal and public newsletters, additional training was
provided to employees interacting with the public, and voter
information tables were staffed in government buildings highly
trafficked by employees and the general public.
During the recently concluded session of the Maryland General
Assembly, legislation was adopted in response to reports of
Maryland citizens being unable to vote after completing a change
of address form at Maryland’s Motor Vehicle Administration.
Maryland Senate Bill 740 and Maryland House Bill 1458 will
simplify the voter registration process for a voter moving from
one jurisdiction to another within Maryland by providing for a
simple transfer of registration rather than a "drop and
add" process. In addition, new statutory and administrative
provisions will streamline the transfer of voter information
between the Motor Vehicle Administration and the Maryland State
Board of Elections.
In addition to needed improvements in the voter registration
process, the 2000 Presidential Election dramatically highlighted
the importance of the voting system technology used to cast and
count votes. Maryland’s Governor Parris N. Glendening
appointed a Special Committee on Voting Systems and Elections
Procedures in Maryland on December 4, 2000, before the 2000
Presidential Election was judicially determined, to evaluate the
voting systems and election procedures in Maryland, review
existing standards for recounts and contested elections,
recommend appropriate funding levels to provide Maryland with
accurate, convenient and reliable voting systems, and recommend
statutory and regulatory changes to ensure full and fair
elections. The full 124 page Report and Recommendations of the
Special Committee can be accessed from the Office of the
Secretary of State’s website at http://www.sos.state.md.us.
As a result of its two months of research, study and work,
the Special Committee confirmed that the type of voting system
used by a jurisdiction does make a difference in
the accuracy of the vote count and that election procedures do
affect the quality of the election results. During the past
decade, nineteen Maryland jurisdictions replaced mechanical
lever and punchcard voting systems with optical scan or Direct
Recording Electronic (electronic touchscreen ballot) voting
systems. The change to more technologically advanced voting
systems has been accompanied by a significant reduction in the
percentage of overvotes and undervotes for the highest office on
the ballot. With 2,036,455 voters participating in the 2000
presidential election in Maryland, only 10,553 voters were not
recorded as casting a vote for President yielding a low
percentage of unrecorded votes in sharp contrast to the
experiences in other states. Modern voting systems, specifically
the precinct count optical scan and Direct Recording Electronic
voting systems, can prevent the voter from "overvoting"
a ballot and, in Maryland, have proven to be accurate in vote
counting.
While the transition to new technology is inevitably resisted
for a variety of reasons, employing the most advanced voting
systems and equipment is consistent with our nation’s history
of progress and with the ultimate goal of an informed and
satisfied citizen-voter. In fact, the contemporary debate over
the most appropriate voting system has a clear historical
analogue. As the country’s population grew rapidly, and
suffrage was expanded, the voting system debate in the middle of
the twentieth century was between maintaining very carefully
crafted rules for counting paper ballots and authorizing
mechanical lever voting systems. The fundamental nature of the
debate involving accuracy, security of the ballot, and ease of
voter use has not changed. See "Voting Machines Vs.
Paper Ballots," The Baltimore Sun, May 3, 1935,
(Early Edition). (Copy attached.)
In order to overcome the instinctive security of a paper
audit trail with a marked ballot and other concerns about
advanced voting systems, the selection of electronic voting
systems must be preceded, and accompanied at every step of
implementation, by thorough testing to ensure accurate,
reliable, and secure election results. Maryland and thirty-one
(31) other states have included as part of the state
certification process for voting systems the Voluntary Federal
Voting Systems Standards developed by the Office of Election
Administration and the National Association of State Election
Directors. While these voluntary standards have been implemented
in a majority of states, adequate resources need to be allocated
to the Office of Election Administration for continuous updating
of the standards as voting system technology evolves.
In American politics, close elections are not unusual and
occur regularly at every level of government and in every state.
In Maryland, the 1800 presidential election produced a tie in
the State’s electoral votes. In the 1904 presidential
election, the difference between the leading Republican and
Democratic state electors was a mere fifty-one (51) votes.
Former Congressman Kweisi Mfume commenced his distinguished
career with a narrow three (3) vote primary election victory in
a 1979 race for City Council. Important offices at county and
municipal levels of government are often closely decided and, in
some recent instances, have been decided by a single vote or
resulted in a tie vote. The frequent occurrence of close
elections demands that the voting systems and equipment used in
elections be accurate and reliable and that election procedures
be open, clearly understood, and fair. In the future, there will
be close elections for statewide offices, the U.S. House of
Representatives, the U.S. Senate and, perhaps again, for
President of the United States.
In a speech to the delegates of the Constitutional Convention
in 1787 urging an end to divisiveness and in support of the
proposed new governing document, Ben Franklin observed,
"Much of the strength and efficiency of
any government, in procuring and securing happiness to the
people, depends on opinion, on the general opinion of the
goodness of that government, as well as of the
wisdom and integrity of its governors."
Franklin’s observations ring true today. The citizens’
perception and opinion of their government and political leaders
is based, in large part, on their level of trust in fair, open,
and accurate elections. Improvements in voting systems and
election procedures are therefore a crucial component in
promoting the essential relationship in our democratic form of
government between actively engaged citizens and a fair,
responsive government which was cherished by our nation’s
founders. In order to manifest the wisdom and integrity urged by
Ben Franklin, a strong federal, state, and local partnership
needs to be forged for election reform.
While elections have historically been funded by local
government, the federal government as well as state governments
should partner with counties and municipalities in the funding
of the comprehensive election management systems. Members of the
election community know the problems with current election
administration and know how to solve them. What these
hardworking and dedicated election officials need are resources
to make the necessary changes to improve the administration and
conduct of elections in the United States.
State and local governments should not bear alone the full
burden of implementation of new technologies for voter
registration and voting systems. The National Association of
Secretaries of State ("NASS") adopted on February 6,
2001, a useful resolution to guide federal, state, and local
officials in election reform efforts. (Copy attached.)
Accordingly, I strongly urge this Senate Committee and the
United States Congress to seize the opportunity presented by the
increased public awareness resulting from the confusing and
uncertain 2000 Presidential Election. I encourage the federal
financial support for state and local election officials and
suggest an annual appropriation from the U.S. Congress of $1.00
per individual of voting age in each state to assist in the
necessary improvements of the equipment, voting systems, and
procedures used in the conduct of federal, state, and local
elections. Together, we can take significant, wise steps forward
in assuring the integrity of the conduct of elections for all of
the citizens of our country and ensure that the voice of the
people is correctly and unambiguously heard. |