|
Breakthroughs in
states requiring voting equipment to support fair election
methods
The California draft Help America Vote
Act (HAVA) plan was released on June 17. It has very clear
language about promoting compatibility with instant runoff / ranked choice
ballots and with cumulative voting. The Massachusetts final HAVA
plan and Vermont's HAVA report also have strong language
about equipment supporting instant runoff voting, and New Jersey's HAVA report
has language about proportional voting methods in general. See
excerpts and links below.
In addition, legislation moving in New York state on
voting equipment has clear language on ranked-choice systems. The
bill, which passed the assembly on June 19, states that new voting
machines must "possess the capacity to, or capacity to be easily
modified so as to, provide for ranked order voting and cumulative
voting." The senate will take up the bill in the fall.
As we have argued in our national testimony, we
believe the case is strong that requiring this capacity when
obtaining new equipment is cost-free, while waiting to add it to
existing equipment in the future can be very expensive. We believe
this is likely true of other potential democratic innovations that
are well worth seeking to anticipate in the purchasing stage.
In addition to information to links from states
referenced above, you also will find below information about the
Michigan NAACP's support for standards in support of fair election
methods and about FairVote Minnesota's efforts to promote these
standards in its state.
Here is info about each state:
California
Massachusetts
Vermont
New Jersey
Michigan
HAVA state plan in California
http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/hava.htm
Ranked ballot and cumulative voting compatibility appear in Section
1.
Hava Compliance With Voting Systems
Standards
In consultation with local elections officials
and other interested parties, including an advisory committee
constituted for those purposes by the Secretary of State, and after
considering any voluntary guidelines adopted by the Commission
pursuant to Subtitle B of Title III, California will, through the
regulatory, legislative, voting system certification and
decertification processes, or otherwise, comply with HAVA, including
the replacement of voting systems that do not comply. In order to
help restore the integrity of the voting process, increase the
opportunity for all eligible citizens to participate in that
process, and to comply with HAVA, the State, under the direction of
the Secretary of State, as Chief Elections Officer,11 will, in
conjunction with the consultation referred to above, in part:
- support, promote and
encourage the use of direct recording electronic (DRE/touchscreen)
voting systems, at polling places in California, and optical scan
systems that are used for tabulating vote-by-mail ballots, that
are compatible with alternative voting methods such as ranked
ballot and cumulative voting...
- consider, through established processes,
decertifying systems and refusing to certify systems that cannot
accommodate alternative voting systems, such as ranked ballots and
cumulative voting systems, in a manner in which voters can easily
understand;
- regularly evaluate voting systems to assess
error rates, reliability and accuracy factors, accessibility to
voters with disabilities, language assistance needs and literacy
needs, and ability to accommodate alternative voting systems; work
with local elections officials to share information and make
improvements...
Massachusetts
final HAVA plan
http://www.state.ma.us/sec/ele/elepdf/havafinal.doc
Ranked ballot and cumulative voting compatibility
appear in Element 1, page 10.
HAVA Compliance with voting systems standards:
In an effort to retain the integrity of the voting
process, increase the
opportunity for all eligible citizens to
participate in that process, and to comply with HAVA, the
Commonwealth, under the direction of the Secretary of the
Commonwealth, as Chief Elections Officer, will, in
part:
(d) develop voting system standards
requiring, as part of certification
process, that the system
demonstrate the ability to support a representative set of possible
future ballot procedure changes, including instant runoff voting, as
feasible, with an upgrade cost that is substantially less than the
cost of complete system replacement...
Vermont HAVA
plan
http://www.sec.state.vt.us/hava/HAVA_final.doc
The Vermont HAVA plan contains
this sentence on page 12 discussing the requirements of new voting
machines. They must be able to ...
"Export an anonymous record of
each vote into a secure data file in order to support the option to
use rank order ballots or instant runoff voting."
New Jersey
HAVA plan
http://www.state.nj.us/lps/elections/hava_plan.html
Key reference is on page 25
in Section 4 on voting machines: "Further, explicit power
should be granted to the Attorney General, on the basis of the
voting machine committee recommendations, to de-certify any voting
machine that is shown to not meet HAVA requirements. In short,
current law has been outpaced by the growing technological advances
and must be revised. Any such revision to statutes or
regulations should be flexible enough to consider the
capability of a voting system to adapt to changes in voting
procedures, such as proportional or cumulative voting, which are
concepts being considered in other jurisdictions."
New York
State Legislation A08847, The Voting Systems Standard Act
of 2003
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A08847&sh=
t
The relevant part is Section
7-202, paragraph 1-U, which states that new voting machines must
"possess the capacity to, or capacity to be easily modified so as
to, provide for ranked order voting and cumulative voting."
Michigan
State Conference of the NAACP's Recommendations for HAVA in
Michigan" www.michigannaacp.org
June 10, 2003
VOTING SYSTEMS (voting machines)
· Purchase Machines With IRV & Advanced Voting
Capability. The Michigan HAVA plan should require that any voting
system selection, monies spent, purchase/lease agreements entered
into or request for proposals for new voting machines or technology,
be able to accommodate ranked order and cumulative voting ballots.
Equipment should be required to handle:
- vote for one candidate only (plurality and runoff
elections)
- vote for more than one candidate (at large
plurality, limited voting)
- give more than one vote to one or more candidates
(cumulative voting)
- rank candidates in order of
choice (instant runoff voting, choice)
FairVote MN
Action Alert: Kiffmeyer's HAVA Plan (Letter to members from
Tony Solgard) www.fairvotemn.org
We need your help! There is a once-in-a-century
opportunity before us. I'm referring to the millions of dollars
coming to Minnesota to improve elections under the Help America Vote
Act (HAVA).
In response to the troubled 2000 Presidential
election, Congress passed HAVA, sending billions of dollars to the
states over the next few years to replace outmoded voting machines,
empower disabled persons to vote without assistance, make sure no
one is turned away from the polls due to a flawed voter registration
system, and allow each voter to cast an effective vote and correct
the ballot in case of an error.
Each state can write a plan for how to use its share
of the funds. After meeting the requirements of the new law, states
have considerable flexibility on how to use the funds to improve
elections. Congress intended these plans to be developed with broad
public input to meet diverse needs.
Minnesota will have an easier time meeting HAVAs
requirements than most states. That should give us more flexibility
to sponsor studies and demonstrations of alternative voting systems
and make sure electronic voting equipment is secure and compatible
with instant runoff voting.
I said should. Unfortunately, Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer's
plan does little more than recite HAVAs requirements and
fails to say how those requirements will be met. You can read her
proposed plan at http://www.sos.state.mn.us/HAVA/HAVA.html. After a public review and comment period running through July 8,
the plan will be finalized and submitted to the federal government.
FairVote Minnesota has written a 7-page letter to
Secretary Kiffmeyer detailing recommended changes to the plan. You
can read it at http://www.FairVoteMN.org /articles/comment61703.html. I've been
interviewed about our critique by the Star Tribune and WCCO Radio.
Minnesota Public Radio reported our story as well. But its not
enough; we need your help to influence the final plan.
Many of you responded to an earlier call to action.
Thank you! This is a new appeal in response to a new opportunity to
influence the outcome and we need you to respond, even if you
already responded to the earlier appeal.
1. Write to Secretary Kiffmeyer, 180 State Office
Building, Saint Paul MN 55155. Or send her an email: [email protected]. The message:
a. Require new electronic voting equipment to produce
a record of each ballot for security and auditing purposes.
b. Require that new voting equipment have the
flexibility to support ranked order voting methods such as instant
runoff voting.
c. Make funds available for studies and demonstrations
of alternative voting systems.
2. Send a letter to the editor with the same message.
3. Get your city council or county board to pass a
resolution in favor of these recommendations.
Please send us a copy of your letter or email to
Secretary Kiffmeyer and your letter to the editor when it is
published. Let us know if you want assistance getting a resolution
passed by your local government. This is a tremendous opportunity to
move this effort forward. I hope I can count on your support.
Best regards, Tony Solgård, President
PS Great news! The League of Women Voters of Minnesota
voted to study instant runoff voting.
The Star Tribune strongly endorsed instant runoff
voting.
The Hopkins City Council
unanimously passed a resolution calling on the State of Minnesota to
make sure new voting equipment is ranked-ballot compatible so that
local governments can have the option to use an alternative voting
method. Your city council or county board could do this
too!
|
