Below is a collection of some of the news stories featuring the California Voter Foundation's activities and projects. Some of the links below go to sites that require registration in order to view their stories, and some of the links may expire after stories are moved into fee-based archives.

---

Being first can be costly

By Michelle DeArmond and Kimberly Trone, The Press-Enterprise, April 24, 2007

Inland voters could find themselves voting with paper ballots in future elections if the touch-screen voting machines can't be certified as secure, experts said this week.

Complaints about the security of touch-screen voting machines have been growing throughout the nation and state, including in the Inland area. Critics have charged that touch-screen machines are more vulnerable to fraud and manipulation by political interests.

San Bernardino County's top election official said she is hopeful that the county's system will pass a state review.

- - - - -

Regardless of what Bowen does, one elections watcher said she suspects growing numbers of people are going to conclude that electronic voting is not the safest system.

"I would not be surprised if other counties move in that direction as well, whether there is a federal or state mandate," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a nonpartisan and nonprofit organization. "I think we got ahead of ourselves in electronic voting."

She said she hopes that government officials, when deciding how to proceed, will consider reliability and voter confidence instead of the cost of replacing existing systems, if it comes to that.

Pam Smith, president of VerifiedVoting.org, said in the long run, the costs of touch-screen machines likely will exceed those of lower-tech systems. Her group is urging counties to switch to paper systems as a cheaper alternative that requires less storage and less maintenance. Many counties have made similar conclusions.

"It has been kind of a trend, and I think from our perspective a positive one," she said. (full story)

Campaign spending records go online

By Diane Dietz, The Register-Guard, March 28, 2007

Oregon voters are about to benefit from a quantum leap in the amount and quality of information available about campaign donors and the money that sways state and local elections.

Early this year, the state launched an online campaign finance database and began requiring all candidates and officeholders to report, within 30 days of receipt, all the donations they get. The deadline shrinks to seven days in the six weeks before each election.

The new system allows anyone with Internet access to easily see which individuals, companies and interest groups are donating money to politicians.

The continuous online reporting is a huge leap forward from the cumbersome paper reports that PACs and candidates previously had to file at set - and often distant - intervals.

Now, activists will be able to use the state Web site to check as often as they like on the latest receipts and expenditures of a candidate or political action committee.

If knowledge is power, the new database makes Oregon citizens more powerful than people in most - and maybe all - other states.

"Oregon is on the cutting edge of disclosure changes that many states are considering. Other states will be keeping a close eye on Oregon," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, which studies disclosure laws and practices in the 50 states.

- - - - -

Under the old system, political action committees didn't have to report the money they collected or spent until September - leaving as much as eight months of political activity in the dark.

That won't do in the Internet age, Alexander said. "Why we should have huge gaps of time between when contributions are made and when they're reported?" she asked.

This year, for the first time, voters can track how much key political action committees have in their coffers during the Legislative session. For example, the Oregon PERS Retirees is reporting $43,408; the Oregon Restaurant PAC, $63,961; and the Oregon Medical PAC $140,695.

The database system adopted by the Legislature requires candidates and PACs to enter their contribution and expenditure records in a standard format on a Web-based form.

The public, journalists and other political watchdogs then have instant access to the standardized data. Gone are the trips to Salem to dig through paper records. Watchdogs can download the data into an Excel spreadsheet with the click of a button. (full story)

Kim Alexander discussed California's manual recount process to verify election results with host Jeffrey Callison

Capital Public Radio, December 8, 2006

(Audio clip available online)

Nov. 7: Tipping point for e-voting?

By Greg Kane, Stockton Record, December 4, 2006

Excerpt:

Technically, the Nov. 7 election was a success for supporters of the touchscreen voting machines on which more than 100,000 San Joaquin County voters cast ballots.

Politically, the election's results could turn out to be their worst nightmare.

Debra Bowen, a Democratic state senator from Redondo Beach, defeated incumbent Bruce McPherson in the race for secretary of state on Election Day. Bowen is a vocal critic of the Diebold voting machines used in San Joaquin County and has promised to review all the electronic equipment McPherson certified earlier this year.

Deborah Hench, San Joaquin County's top elections official, won't speculate on what Bowen's election means to the future of the 1,625 ATM-like Diebold TSx machines the county agreed to purchase for $5.7million three years ago. And while few believe the new secretary of state will begin her tenure by decertifying the equipment, some electronic-voting opponents believe Bowen will be more open to their concerns.

- - - - -

Kim Alexander, president and founder of the Davis-based California Voter Foundation, said last week that some elections officials across the state have expressed worries about a new secretary of state taking over.

Alexander does not believe Bowen will take office and make drastic changes, although Bowen certainly has the authority to do so.

"She could decertify e-voting machines the day she takes office if she wanted to," Alexander said. "The secretary of state has a tremendous amount of authority."

Hench, San Joaquin County's registrar of voters, says the equipment performed well in November despite some problems getting them up and running on Election Day.

The machines also sped up the ballot-counting process: The county posted its final results at 12:35 a.m., its earliest tally from a primary or general election since at least 1990.

Still, Hench acknowledges that the county could be in for more questions about the system's future.

"It's hard to know what's going to happen," Hench said. "(Bowen) is going to have her staff review all the systems. What happens after that, nobody knows." (full story)

 

Bowen plans upgrades to Cal-Access

By Malcolm Maclachlan, Capitol Weekly, November 23, 2006

Excerpt:

The knock on our democracy is that it's too much like an auction. Incoming Secretary of State Debra Bowen said she wants to counter pay-for-play government by making campaign finances as easy to search as eBay.
Bowen is planning major improvements for the Cal-Access Web site. While she has yet to set a timetable, she did say the redesign will focus on factors like standardizing the formats of names, having late disclosures cataloged more quickly and making it easier to search for information around independent-expenditure committees. There are also plans to make it easier to find trace which committees are being controlled by particular politicians.

"My goal is to create a system that's as easy to use and provides as much information in a user-friendly format as possible," Bowen said.

While she doesn't have specific changes ready to announce, Bowen said the main goal will be to move Cal-Access from a "form-driven" to a "data-driven" model. Cal-Access was launched in 2000 by then-Secretary of State Bill Jones in response to legislation. It basically took existing campaign forms and put them online. While there were many usability improvements, such as offering lists of donations in Excel format, the data is not yet gathered with the Web in mind, Bowen said.

Kim Alexander, president and founder California Voter Foundation, applauded this approach, saying she hoped Bowen would enable better coordination between the information gathered by the Fair Political Practices Commission and data made available by the secretary of state's office.

"If there are going to be significant changes in Cal-Access, you'll have to change the way data is filed," Alexander said.
When Cal-Access first came online, it was the best state campaigns Web site in the country, she said. However, we ranked only third behind Washington and Virginia--with a "B+" grade--when the CVF rated the states last year. The Web site was created via 1997 legislation by then-Senator Betty Karnette when she chaired the Senate Elections Committee. This followed previous attempts by Senator Tom Hayden in 1995 and Assemblywoman Jackie Speier in 1996.

The site has been a "work in progress" ever since, Alexander said. During his time as secretary of state, Kevin Shelley added search functions and created pages for ballot propositions. Among the improvements she would like to see, Alexander said, are better labeling of the sections on the Web site and the release of finance summaries for campaigns and propositions. (full story)

Hand Recount Underway In California

By Ellen Ciurczak, Capital Public Radio, Nov. 22, 2006
(Audio clip available online)

New Tools Help 2006 Campaigns

By Jenny O'Mara, Capital Public Radio, Nov. 20, 2006

(Audio clip available online)

Latest vote count expected

By Michelle DeArmond And Kimberly Trone, The Press-Enterprise, November 21, 2006

Excerpt:

Election workers were counting the last of Riverside County's absentee ballots Monday as they prepared to post their first results update since Nov. 8.

The registrar's office had fewer than 10,000 ballots left to count Monday afternoon and planned to update the results sometime this week, said Rebecca Martine, Riverside County's deputy registrar.

Workers started counting about 100,000 outstanding absentee ballots Thursday and worked through part of the weekend to finish them. The ballots were turned in just before or on Election Day two weeks ago and have left a few races hanging in the balance.

Although the registrar has until Dec. 5 to complete and certify the results, some candidates and others have been critical of Registrar Barbara Dunmore for having so many ballots uncounted so long after the election. The absentee ballots that were turned in late accounted for about a third of the votes cast.

One candidate, Phil Paule, criticized the registrar for not releasing the late results as the ballots are counted.
"The public perception of this election has been that of a colossal failing for your office," Paule wrote to Dunmore. Paule is an Eastern Municipal Water District Division 1 candidate with a 74-vote lead.

- - - - -

Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, said many counties may be taking the full month to tabulate results this year, although candidates tend to pressure registrars for faster results.

"The only thing worse than a slow vote is a hasty and incorrect vote count," Alexander said Monday.

Alexander said she was concerned in general about problems with the Nov. 7 election, including reports of long lines and technological problems in counties across the state.

"Cumulatively, that can greatly erode voter confidence, and that's what concerns me," Alexander said. "Voters can be left with the impression that the results from the election may not be reliable."

Riverside County supervisors, who meet today, also said they are concerned about long waits at polling sites on Election Day and shortages of paper cartridges that contributed to the delays. (full story)

California officials report only minor voting problems

By Paul Elias, San Jose Mercury News, November 8, 2006

Excerpt:

he voting nightmare that California registrars feared didn't happen Tuesday.

Instead, a series of isolated malfunctions and technological hiccups forced some voters in the nation's most populous state to cast provisional ballots. Some sites opened later than 7 a.m., and technological glitches made for 90-minute lines in Riverside County as polls closed.

Riverside technicians couldn't change printer cartridges fast enough to keep up with demand, and some voters who arrived before the 8 p.m. closing time didn't cast ballots until 9:15 p.m. - after some races had been called.

"I would rate the performance as 'needs improvement,'" said Riverside registrar Barbara Dunmore. "We need to get more printers out there so voters can vote in a timely manner."

Dunmore blamed the system overload on a lengthy ballot and high turnout among the county's 758,000 voters. The secretary of state predicted 55 percent turnout.

California appeared free of more worrisome reports in other states, including allegations of voter intimidation. In Arizona, three men, one of them armed, stopped Hispanic voters and questioned them outside a Tucson polling place, according to the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

- - - - -

"There are chronic problems with voting that can greatly erode voter confidence," said Kim Alexander, president of the watchdog group California Voter Foundation. "Just because it's not worse than last election doesn't make it all right."

The recent ballot listed candidates for eight statewide offices, 13 propositions and local ballot measures in nearly all 58 counties. Given the complexity, many absentee voters postponed filling out and mailing their ballots until Monday, and others dropped off ballots at polling stations Tuesday.

Those ballots won't likely be counted for several days.

"It takes a longer time to process absentee votes, especially the ones that come in at the last minute," Contra Costa County Clerk Stephen L. Weir said before the election. "It drives everyone crazy."

About 44 percent of Californians were expected to turn in absentee ballots.

Printers used to provide voter-verifiable paper records on Diebold machines temporarily jammed Tuesday morning at some San Diego County sites. (full story)

E-voting anxiety drives key race

By Steven Harmon, San Jose Mercury News, November 4, 2006

Excerpt:

At the core of the campaign to decide the state's next top election official is a question troubling many voters: Will each vote be counted accurately?

The issue has sent Secretary of State Bruce McPherson scrambling to reassure voters that the election system he oversees is working. But Debra Bowen, his Democratic challenger, has seized on voters' anxieties over potential abuses of electronic touch-screen voting machines -- just when more voters than ever will be using them.

"This election is about addressing the incredible loss of confidence in the whole voting system,'' said Bowen, a Redondo Beach term-limited state senator. ``It's a serious problem when you have the potential for tampering and it's even a bigger problem when people lose faith in the machinery of elections.''

"The major difference between us,'' said Bowen, who leads McPherson 40 percent to 34 percent in this week's Field Poll, "is that he trusts the system and I don't.''

McPherson accuses Bowen of fear mongering, saying he has put in place a number of security measures that will ensure the integrity of the vote, particularly in the 23 counties -- including Santa Clara and San Mateo -- that will use various touch-screen machines.

"We can't, as Bowen would like to, go back to the days of hanging chads and butterfly ballots,'' McPherson said. "I'm very serious that we do this the right way. The integrity of the vote is the most important thing I need to protect. I'm not going to certify a system that doesn't meet the highest standard.''

- - - - -

"I want to assure all California voters,'' McPherson said, ``that their vote will be counted and recorded accurately.''

McPherson has gone farther than any of his predecessors in testing touch-screen voting systems, though there are still significant concerns, said Kim Alexander, president and founder of the California Voter Foundation, a non-partisan organization that advocates responsible uses of voter technology.

"On the one hand, McPherson has implemented more rigorous testing than we've ever seen in California,'' Alexander said. ``But on the other hand, the Diebold touch-screen is physically insecure. It's easy to open the machines, take out the memory card and replace it, opening up the possibility of hacking.''

Computer scientists around the country have found that the Diebold TSx machine's security is vulnerable. This summer, a Princeton computer-science professor and two of his graduate students showed how easily it can be hacked and manipulated with unauthorized software that could alter vote tallies -- later demonstrating the hacking at a congressional hearing.

That came after McPherson certified the Diebold machines in February.

But it's not as if he wasn't aware of the potential for problems. His own office's Voting Systems Technology Assessment Advisory Board identified 16 security flaws in the Diebold machines the very day he certified them.

The panel cited "a number of security vulnerabilities,'' but it also concluded that ``they are all easily fixable'' and ``manageable.''

Whether or not that's the case may be one of the more important questions answered Tuesday -- and, coupled with whom voters choose to oversee the state's elections -- may go a long way in determining the future of electronic voting in California. (full story)

E-voting safer -- but safe enough?

By Chris Bagley, North County Times, November 4, 2006

Excerpt:

When some 200,000 voters in Riverside County go to the polls Tuesday, they'll cast votes on a computerized voting system that is subject to an ever-larger number of safeguards, but that continues to generate controversy and demands for additional security.

Riverside County used touch-screen voting terminals in a San Jacinto municipal election in August 1999, and became the first county in California to do so on a large scale that November. By the 2000 presidential election, every polling place in the county was equipped with them.

The chaos that paper ballots created elsewhere that year ---- most notably in Florida ---- hastened the adoption of touchscreens around the country, but it also showed Americans how flaws in voting systems could leave even the results of a presidential election in question.

Since then, more and more U.S. cities and counties have begun using touchscreens. By November 2004, about 50 million ---- or 29 percent ---- of the nation's voters were registered in counties that use touchscreens, according to Election Data Services Inc., a consulting firm. Recent studies have estimated that another 10 million to 20 million U.S. voters will use touch screens for the first time Tuesday.

At the same time, voters' distrust of them remains surprisingly strong. Several states and counties have abandoned touchscreens in the last two years.

About 80 percent of Americans believe that election officials shouldn't rely solely on the machines and their proprietary software, according to a poll of 1,018 adults conducted in August by Zogby International.

In a Gallup survey of 526 likely voters last month, 46 percent of registered voters expressed a "great deal" of confidence in electronic voting machines, with 34 percent expressing a "fair amount" and 19 percent expressing "not much." Paper ballots fared slightly worse, with 38 percent of voters expressing "great confidence" and 22 percent expressing "not much."

The distrust has been fueled by people ranging from conspiracy theorists to voters who have experienced actual glitches with the machines. Additionally, several computer scientists have demonstrated how ---- in the absence of thorough oversight ---- the computers can be hacked and vote tallies changed on a large scale, though no such hacking attempt has been documented in an actual election.

In California, new regulations have aimed to boost confidence and provide reliable backup to the electronic machines. This year's primary elections, in June, were the first to require a paper printout of each vote cast on the electronic machines. Such printouts stay inside the machines and are fished out in the event of a recount.

- - - - -

A random 1 percent of those printouts are counted in every race as a check of the reliability of the electronic tally. A similar requirement has existed for 40 years, but it was just last year that the state Legislature applied it explicitly to touch-screen systems.

"We've made a huge amount of progress in California over the last six years," said Kim Alexander, president of the nonprofit California Voter Foundation. "But we still have a long way to go."

The entire nation is a patchwork of voting systems. In several states, such as Georgia and Nevada, every county uses touch screens.

Alabama, Michigan and several other states don't allow them. In Oregon, a voter marks and then mails in a paper ballot or hand-delivers it to the local county elections office.

Many other states are themselves patchworks of voting systems. California's secretary of state has certified a range of voting machines. Most counties use touchscreens made by Sequoia Voting Systems of Oakland, as Riverside County does; by Ohio-based Diebold Inc., which San Diego County uses; or by Election Systems & Software of Omaha.

Some of the same counties ---- and others ---- use what are known as "optical scan" ballots. Voters indicate their choices by filling in circles or squares on the ballots; an electronic machine scans and counts them.

California's voting systems, as a whole, compare favorably to most other states' in terms of security and ease of use, Alexander said. Still, she bemoaned the wide variations among the counties, saying that too many have low security standards or don't make voting as easy as they could.

One example of that variety is in the practice of posting the vote counts from each precinct at the polling place. The California Elections Code appears to require the practice, which goes back at least to the 1960s, but elections officials in more than half of the counties in the state have given it up, saying the requirement applied only to machines in use in the 1960s.

Such posting is intended to allow citizen watchdog groups to doublecheck the tallies generated by machines at the precinct against the tallies produced by a central counter. (full story)

Mail-in ballots arriving slowly; officials say voters undecided

By Stephanie Hoops, Ventura County Star, November 4, 2006

Excerpt:

Election officials suspect it will take a full week to count the votes after Tuesday’s election because absentee voters seem to be waiting to send their ballots in.

While the mail-in ballots have been available to voters since Oct. 9, they came in more slowly than usual, said Gene Browning, assistant registrar of voters for Ventura County.

As of Friday, the county had about 57,724 (40 percent) of the 144,000 absentee ballots it mailed out.

Of course, many of the absentee ballots might simply go unused, removing the need to count them, but voting experts suspect many voters are holding out to vote, on the fence with their decisions.

"It may be that people are waiting to make up their minds," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a nonprofit, nonpartisan Davis-based organization that provides online voter information.

Shirley Cobb has her mind made up. She filled her absentee ballot out, but she’s driving it to the elections office Tuesday from her home in Camarillo because she doesn’t want to take a chance on the mail.

"I want to be sure it’s OK," she said.

With more and more people voting from the comfort of home, Alexander said more time will be necessary for counting.

That’s something that campaigns and news organizations need to keep in mind, she said, as they demand quick information from elections officials.

"They feel rushed to get it out quickly because of the demand, but with tightly contested races decided on narrow margins, it can take a day or two — or even weeks — before results are finalized," Alexander said.

Ballots cast at the polls get processed faster, but absentee ballots have to be sorted into precincts, screened for errors, sliced open and flattened before they get scanned. At the polls, voters just stick them in the scanner and go.

"It’s great to give voters convenient ways to vote, but we have to remember that doing so can result in slower vote counts," Alexander said. "When votes are brought to polling places, they get counted last."

The mail-in absentee ballots get counted first, polling-place votes second and then provisional and late absentee ballots. (full story)

California Songs: "The Proposition Song"

California Report, KQED-FM, November 3, 2006

(Audio clip available online)

Voting machine CEO denies allegations, He says Venezuela is not an investor

By Greg Lucas, San Francisco Chronicle, October 31, 2006

Excerpt:

A company that provides electronic voting machines in the United States -- including those in 21 California counties -- is formally asking the U.S. Treasury Department to investigate what it says are untrue accusations that its ownership by Venezuelan investors is tied to the leftist government of President Hugo Chavez.

Antonio Mugica, the CEO of Smartmatic Corp., owner of Oakland-based Sequoia Voting Systems Inc., said at a news conference Monday in Washington that the Venezuelan government has never invested in either company nor have they been influenced by Chavez.

"No foreign government, from any country, has ever owned a stake in Smartmatic," said Mugica, adding that the same charge has been leveled against the company since 2004 when it won the bid to handle the Venezuelan recall and referendum, which Chavez won.

"We have the most secure and advanced voting system out there. We want to make sure we can keep being successful, Mugica said. "That's why it's important for us to clear these allegations once -- and hopefully -- for all."

Questions about being able to manipulate a voter's ballot choices on a Sequoia machine -- which are used in 16 states and the District of Columbia -- is just the latest complaint about the reliability of electronic voting machines, complaints that tend to get louder as elections get closer.

- - - - -

"This investigation illustrates why private corporate ownership of voting equipment is problematic. We shouldn't have to wonder if our election results could be influenced by corporate or foreign interests," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a nonprofit group that promotes responsible use of voting technology.

Smartmatic asked for a formal review of its Sequoia purchase by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, the same federal entity that examined a proposed purchase by a Dubai company that would have placed Dubai in charge of some operations at six U.S. ports. (full story)

Who's on your answering machine?

By Elizabeth Fitzsimons, San Diego Union-Tribune, October 31, 2006

Excerpt:

It's that time of year again. Halloween costume shops suddenly appear in strip malls, Santa Anas start to blow, and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is leaving messages on your answering machine.

“This is Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. You will be receiving your ballot for the November election by mail this week,” began a recent message.

Didn't get that call? Well, maybe you heard from Barbara Boxer. Bill Clinton's been leaving messages, too.

The automated call, or “robocall,” has become a staple of political campaigns, if not their most annoying play for your attention. They fill up your answering machine, interrupt your dinner. Some calls are programmed to hang up if a live person answers, leaving you to wonder: Wrong number? Stalker?

“It's distancing and it's not interactive, and everything we know about communications is it's not satisfying,” said Barbara O'Connor, director of the Institute for the Study of Politics and Media at California State University Sacramento.

For most voters, they are a minor nuisance, like the political pieces that go straight from the mailbox to the trash bin. People hit delete the moment they realize the message is canned.

“I don't mind them, I just don't generally listen to them,” said Dana Levy, 60, a retired plumber who for the past couple of weeks has been receiving about two robocalls a day at his University Heights home.

Yet, political campaigns, exempt from the constraints of the do-not-call registry because their messages are protected free speech, find the automated call hard to resist. Calls can target voters by party affiliation, age, race, gender, how often they voted in the past few elections. They can home in on absentee voters, or voters who haven't yet made it to the polls on Election Day.

- - - - -

The calls caused such a furor that some states have cracked down. Indiana law requires a live voice on the line, not a recording, unless the receiving party previously agreed to receiving a recorded call.

Last week, a federal judge ruled that the state could prohibit a California company from making robocalls against a Democratic congressional candidate. The company, FreeEats.com, was hired by the Economic Freedom Fund, which was supporting the candidate's Republican opponent.

FreeEats.com argued the ban was an unconstitutional restraint on free speech and interstate commerce. The company said it was reviewing the decision, but did not say whether it would appeal on First Amendment grounds.

In Colorado, state legislator Bernie Buescher has made robocalls a campaign issue. Buescher pledged to run a robocall-free campaign.

There's been no move by lawmakers to ban the calls in California.

Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, finds the calls dehumanizing and exclusionary.

“The campaigns are precisely targeting the message to the voters they find most desirable, so a lot of voters aren't getting those calls,” Alexander said.

She advises voters to call their registrar of voters office and ask that their phone numbers be stricken from records. Few people know that they are not required to provide their telephone number on a registration form, Alexander said. It's not an immediate solution, she said, but something that could help down the road. (full story)

Voters facing new problems in mix-up

By Charles Levin, Ventura County Star, October 31, 2006

Excerpt:

Absentee voters in parts of the Conejo and Ojai valleys will have a few more days to request new ballots if they were mailed ones listing the wrong races, the county's election chief said Monday.

Warning letters went out last week explaining the ballot problem to voters in both areas. But 870 Conejo Valley residents who registered as absentee voters got the wrong warning letter, Gene Browning, Ventura County's assistant registrar, said Monday.

The printing company mistakenly sent letters to the Conejo Valley that discussed the Ojai Valley problems, Browning said.

Under state law, officials can start opening absentee ballot envelopes and counting votes today, marking an unofficial deadline for requesting a new absentee ballot.

Now, however, the Elections Division will not open absentee ballots for the two valley areas until later this week, giving people a few more days to get a new ballot. Browning, however, declined to be more specific on a new deadline.

"It's going to depend on how the rest of my workload goes and if I get many more calls" about the problem, Browning said.

Browning seemed confident that the absentee problem, which surfaced last week, had not spread to other parts of the county. "It's just isolated to that handful," Browning said.

Absentee ballots come as two cards. Candidate races and measures are listed on both sides of each card.

- - - - -

County Clerk-Recorder Phil Schmit and a Sequoia official said last week that they don't believe the mix-up will affect the outcome of any races.

Several voting experts contacted last week by The Star were not so sure.

The problem is not out of the ordinary, said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. Many counties contract out for their voting services, and "vendors ... are overburdened at this time of year," Alexander said.

Alexander noted that voter participation drops off in low-profile contests such as park districts or water boards.

"So the voters who do vote in those races do have a lot of influence," Alexander said. Such races "can be decided by a relatively small margin."

Schmit vowed last week to ensure that the problem doesn't happen again. A Sequoia official said the company would meet with county officials about the matter.

County Supervisor Linda Parks, who represents the Conejo Valley, said Monday that she wants to make sure that every absentee voter gets a correct ballot.

"If it takes an official knocking on everyone's door, giving everyone a correct ballot, then that's what needs to happen," Parks said. (full story)

Electioneering Goes Digital

By Emily Alpert, Gilroy Dispatch, October 28, 2006

Excerpt:

As election day nears, campaign plugs weigh down the mailbox, blare from the radio and the TV, and now, clutter your e-mail.

Years ago, California added e-mail to its voter registration form. It's not a required field, and the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters doesn't use it, but some campaigns are snapping up the data to send campaign information online.

"If you look at the way campaigns are won and lost, it's all about the number of ears you reach," said David Oke, a campaign consultant for district attorney candidate Dolores Carr. "The traditional ways of reaching ears" - television, radio, and direct mail - "have been very expensive. E-mail is being driven by how many people you can reach for how little money."

Oke wasn't sure if Carr's campaign has used e-mails harvested from the county registrar's lists. The Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society has used the technique to promote Measure A, noting on its e-mails that the addresses were accessed through the county registrar. The e-mails also give them the option to click on a button and have their addresses removed from the mailing list.

"They say you need to reach out to people seven times for your message to get through, so using different techniques we try to do that," said Peter Drekmeier, spokesman for People for Land and Nature, the environmental consortium that proposed Measure A. "We put signs on sides of buses, ads on television, mailers, e-mail, phone calls and ads in newspapers."

- - - - -

That worries Pam Dixon, executive director of the World Privacy Forum, a public interest research group based in San Diego. When registrars sell voter data, purchasers promise the data won't be used illegally - to market a product, for example.

"But once it's in a database, it's hard to control who has access to it," said Dixon. "That information can get resold, and used for all kinds of flat-out marketing."

She named AnyBirthday.com, now defunct, as an example. Dixon said the Web site gathered birthdates from voter rolls, then charged for the information on its site. In 2003, a Wired News investigation found that Aristotle International, a voter database firm, was selling its lists online without confirming buyers' identities or intent. A reporter purchased data on 1,700 California voters and 900 South Carolina voters under the names 'Condoleezza Rice' and 'Britney Spears.'

Noel Alonzo, 30, provided his e-mail address to the registrar. He hasn't gotten any campaign e-mail yet, and he says he hopes he doesn't. Privacy doesn't worry him: spam does.

"It's junk mail to me," said Alonzo. "It's just more things for me to delete."

California Voter Foundation's Alexander cautioned against dismissing all political e-mail as spam. E-mail is quick, it's convenient, and in low-budget campaigns, it's useful to drum up grassroots support.

"E-mail has been a pivotal tool for engaging millions of people in this country in the political process," Alexander said. "As much as voters may complain about political e-mail spam, the fact is that campaign speech is protected under the First Amendment, and campaigns have the right to contact voters via e-mail. (full story)

Election Day… or Month?

By Emily Alpert, Gilroy Dispatch, October 27, 2006

Excerpt:

For more than 44,000 Santa Clara County voters, the election is over. That's the number of absentee votes already returned to the county Registrar of Voters. If 50 percent of registered voters cast ballots - a high turnout - that means almost 12 percent of votes countywide are already in.

Thirty-five percent of registered voters were mailed absentee ballots this year, according to estimated figures provided by Elma Rosas, the county registrar's media officer. Of the roughly 262,000 absentee ballots mailed in the county, 206,000 were sent to permanent absentee voters, who are automatically mailed their ballots each election.

"We now have a month-long election day," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. "People are busy, and a lot of them have a hard time getting to the polls."

Margaret Ryan, a Gilroy Senior Center volunteer, said she signed up as a permanent absentee voter three or four years ago. She's handicapped, and sometimes walking can be painful. Ryan plans to send in her ballot this weekend.

Absentee voting has stretched the timeline for electoral campaigns, once an endgame blitz of advertising and door-to-door pleas. The last few weeks are still crucial, said Mark Zappa, a Republican campaign activist, but "when absentee ballots are first mailed, you have to hit it hard.

"If you don't," he cautions, "you'll be out in the cold." (full story)

Electronic Voting Reliability in Question

By Emily Alpert, Gilroy Dispatch, October 27, 2006

Excerpt:

Silicon Valley is ground zero for technological innovation, but some say they still don't trust the county's high-tech voting systems.

The county signed a $19-million contract with Oakland-based Sequoia Voting Systems in 2003, bringing touch-screen voting machines to polling booths from Palo Alto to Gilroy. This June, the machines were upgraded to include a voter-verified paper audit trial, said Matt Moreles, a Santa Clara County Registrar spokesperson. Each voter makes their selection on the touch screen, then looks at a paper printout to make sure it's correct. The printout is stored inside the printer, where it can be referred to in a manual recount.

"Electronic machines are the most accurate platforms for voting," said Howard Cramer, Sequoia's vice president of sales. "They're generally faster, generally more secure, and as elections get more complex, it's the only tool available for dealing with that increasing complexity."

- - - - -

Sequoia's machines have had fewer problems than those produced by the much-maligned Diebold Election Systems, said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, and the voter-verified paper trail is a significant step. But she's still "not a fan of electronic voting."

"Anytime you put high-tech equipment into a polling place, there is likely to be some kind of problem," Alexander said.

She cited a case in 2004 in Bernalillo County, New Mexico, where voters had to correct their votes multiple times before the Sequoia AVC Edge machines registered the correct choice. The problem was reported in the Albuquerque Journal. (full story)

Kim Alexander and Friends Perform the "Proposition Song"

KOVR News, October 26, 2006

(Video clip available online)

Secretary of State's Race not exactly a vote machine

By Seema Mehta, Los Angeles Times, October 19, 2006

Excerpt:

The secretary of state contest typically attracts sparse media coverage, scant financial resources and little voter interest. This year is no different; nevertheless, it is shaping up to be one of the most competitive statewide races on the November ballot.

Incumbent Bruce McPherson and his challenger, termed-out state Sen. Debra Bowen of Marina del Rey, are in a virtual dead heat among likely voters, recent polls show.

At first blush, they appear similar — two respected politicians with long tenures in the state Legislature, where they showed a keen interest in the state's electoral system. They support many of the same principles, such as making the office nonpartisan and pressing for campaign finance reform. But they disagree sharply on whether the state's elections are run properly, and particularly on the trustworthiness of electronic voting machines.

Voting advocates say that whoever is elected will play a vital role in the future of the state's and the nation's elections.

"California has provided a lot of leadership for the nation in the area of voting-technology reform," said Kim Alexander, president and founder of the California Voter Foundation, which does not endorse candidates. "Secretary of State McPherson has provided that leadership; Debra Bowen has provided that leadership in her role on the Senate Elections Committee." (full story)

Song highlights ballot measures

By Chris Riva, KCRA News, October 18, 2006

(Video clip available online)

Some fear California's bulky ballots may intimidate voters

By Rachel Konrad, Associated Press, October 17, 2006

Excerpts:

Voter guides are landing with a big thud on doorsteps across California, where residents are confronted with an unusually large number of ballot measures and candidates in next month's election.

Election officials worry that the state's largest guides - 192-page books sent to 12 million homes - will overwhelm and discourage would-be voters.

The array of complicated issues on the ballot could also lead to long lines and delays at polling sites if people haven't done their homework.

-----

Kim Alexander, president of the Davis-based California Voter Foundation, created a jingle to summarize the maze of issues for voters. The catchy tune with banjo accompaniment includes the chorus: "It's the proposition song/because the ballot's too darn long."

"Voting in this state can sometimes feel like doing your taxes," said Alexander, who emphasized that the song isn't meant as a substitute for reading the literature. But she said voters should at least skim the guide - and, if rushed, vote only on issues that are meaningful to them.

"You don't have to have encyclopedic knowledge of a ballot measure to make an informed choice," she said. (full story)

The Buzz: Campaigns Strike Up the Bandwagon

By Steve Wiegand, Sacramento Bee, October 16, 2006

Excerpts:

If "music hath charms to soothe a savage breast," as the 17th-century poet William Congreve observed, then California voters should be going to the polls next month with very docile bosoms.

There's been a spate of campaign songs lately, designed to persuade or educate the electorate on behalf of various political causes.

-----

For you folkies, there's "The Proposition Song." Composed by Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. It condenses all 13 ballot measures into a three-minute Pete Seegerish ditty that can be heard at www.calvoter.org. A sample:

"Oh, there once was a proposition, its number was 1A/ The first of 13 measures to decide by Election Day/ Arnold and the lawmakers want the first 5 props to pass/ 1A would mandate road funding from the sales tax on gas." (full story)

Big Money Is Drawn to Issues

By Virginia Ellis and Dan Morain, Los Angeles Times, October 15, 2006

Excerpts:

In the world of politics, the race for money is as intense as the race for votes because often — not always — the politician or proposition with the most money wins.

In the competition for cash, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Phil Angelides are taking a back seat to two tax measures affecting some of the richest industries in America.

Oil and tobacco interests are investing millions in campaigns opposing Proposition 87's proposed increase in the oil extraction tax and Proposition 86's $2.60-a-pack leap in the cigarette tax. The two battles are the most expensive in this year's election.

------

In California, the dollars collected for candidates and initiative campaigns occupy a stratosphere of their own, dwarfing amounts raised in any other state. In 2004, the most recent nationwide elections, ballot propositions drew $600 million in contributions across the country, more than half of it — or $304 million — in California, according to a study by the Institute on Money in State Politics in Helena, Mont.

Florida ranked next, with $57.8 million raised for ballot measures.

This year, more than $447 million has been amassed for both proposition and candidate races, with the election still weeks away.

Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a nonprofit voter education group, said big money flows into California because it's a bellwether state. Propositions that are successful here are likely to be copied elsewhere.

"A lot of political trends begin in California and take root here through the initiative process," Alexander said. "Stakes are high, and interest groups and corporations are aware the impact California initiatives can have nationally and even internationally."

Stem cell research, term limits and Proposition 13 property tax cuts were California-born initiatives that spread to other states.

"The real tragedy of campaign financing in the initiative process is that hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent to 'educate' voters, and yet most of the money is used to buy television ads that confuse, mislead or scare voters and do just about anything but inform them," Alexander said. (full story)

Get Yer Banjos Out -- it's the Proposition Song!

By Lynda Gledhill, San Francisco Chronicle, October 12, 2006

Excerpt:

If the weighty voter guide that arrived in your mail has become your dog's favorite chew toy, the California Voter Foundation has musical way to try get across what the 13 ballot propositions on the November ballot are all about: The Proposition Song.
The catchy folksong was written by the foundation's president, Kim Alexander and can be found at their web site.

It's hard to argue with the chorus: "It's the Proposition Song; Cause the ballot is too darn long!"

If you don't have the audio, here are the lyrics:

Oh, there once was a proposition, its number was One-A

The first of thirteen measures to decide by Election Day. (November 7th!) (full story)

 

Republicans Have Eyes on Keeping Secretary of State Seat

The Sacramento Union, September 20, 2006

Excerpt:

The race for secretary of state this fall could be the Republicans’ best hope of retaining a statewide office, and it has left the Democratic challenger struggling to find a weakness she can exploit in her moderate opponent.

Incumbent Secretary of State Bruce McPherson has steered a centrist course since being appointed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in March 2005 after Democrat Kevin Shelley resigned amid allegations of financial impropriety.

That has helped him win over many Democrats and left-leaning organizations. He has received the endorsement of groups such as the California Teachers Association, an influential player in statewide political campaigns. He is the first Republican the group has supported for statewide office.

A McPherson win would boost the spirits of his fellow Republicans, who haven’t seen significant victories in California statewide races since 1994.

Such an outcome also could have implications for McPherson beyond the next term, said Mark Baldassare, director of research for the Public Policy Institute of California.

---------------

Although their methods differ, both Bowen and McPherson use the same language to describe their goals for voting reform _ reliability, transparency and accessibility.

That will be a tall order for whoever wins in November, said Kim Alexander, president of the Davis-based California Voter Foundation, a nonprofit group that advances electronic-voting reforms.

“Carrying out that responsibility is increasingly challenging because of competing pressures by groups who want more accuracy and more security and by election officials at the local level who are often reluctant to increase their workload,” she said.

A longtime privacy advocate, Bowen’s other campaign priorities include adding sexual assault victims to the state’s Safe at Home program, which allows abortion clinic workers and victims of domestic violence to keep their addresses confidential and vote by mail.

Both candidates said they would try to engage young voters and further campaign finance reform.

Meanwhile, McPherson and Bowen are trying to persuade undecided voters and drum up enthusiasm for an office that often fails to capture broad public interest.

McPherson enjoys an advantage with heavily stocked campaign coffers. At the end of July, he had $708,000 in remaining funds, compared to Bowen’s $180,000, according to Cal-Access, the state’s online database of candidates’ financial information.(full story)

Political fray includes domain names

The San Jose Mercury News, August 25, 2006

Excerpt:

Call it a case of cyberantics with a cause. The dueling camps over Proposition 87, the November initiative that would impose a fee on oil extracted in California, have been duking it out all week over control of Web site domain names.

In what's being acknowledged as a stunt to drum up support for the initiative, campaign backers got control of a number of Web site addresses with names more suited for the opposition. This week, Web users who clicked on www.noon87.com or www.noonprop87.org, for example, were led to a site created by backers of Proposition 87. The opposition's own site is www.nooiltax.com.

Supporters of the controversial initiative include Silicon Valley venture capitalists, environmentalists and Hollywood liberals. But the cyber prank was no barrel of laughs for opponents that include major oil companies and the powerful California Chamber of Commerce. They sued.

Turns out in California there is a law against such pranks, the California Political Cyberfraud Abatement Act. The legislature passed it in the wake of reports of Web profiteers snapping up politician's names and initiative numbers to create mischief, such as diverting Web surfers to pro-marijuana or white supremacy groups and selling off the sites to the highest bidder.

---------------

Several major oil companies contributed most of the more than $30 million raised by opponents, including $25 million from Chevron, Exxon and Shell. Supporters of Proposition 87 include Hollywood producer Steve Bing, who contributed more than $10 million, and Silicon Valley venture capitalist Vinod Khosla. Khosla and other backers have investments in companies that could benefit if the initiative passes.

"It's a good chunk of change,'' said Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies, who predicted that, despite the substantive policy issues surrounding the initiative," guerrilla tactics by millionaires'' might dissuade voters. Still, backers ended up with a spate of hard-to-get coverage.

"Campaigns engage in this kind of activity online to get people's attention and get their message out through the clutter,'' said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation.(full story)

Candidates priced out of ballot pamphlets

The Capitol Weekly, August 24, 2006

Excerpts:

With its big cities, the skyrocketing costs of television advertisements and the impracticality of campaigning door-to-door, running for statewide office in California has long been an expensive endeavor.

But this year, for the first time, down-ticket campaigns are getting slapped with one more small expense: Candidates for statewide office must now pay for their ballot statements--at the rate of $20 per word--in the state's
official voter guide.

Some activists and candidates are saying the new fee prices them out of what was once their best shot at communicating with a statewide audience.

"Democracy shouldn't have a price tag. Why don't we start charging voters for the cost of voting in elections?" says a sarcastic Larry Cafiero, the Green Party candidate for insurance commissioner. "I am very dismayed that the state thinks they have to charge candidates for this because it doesn't provide a level playing field, especially for third-party candidates."

--------------

"There are very few nonpartisan resources for voters available and the ballot pamphlet is the most important one there is," says Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. "The ballot pamphlet is the one piece of voter information that goes out to every voter. It's a shame that the policy was changed [to make candidates pay]."

The new fee for ballot statements is a consequence of Proposition 34, the 2000 campaign-finance measure approved by voters. That measure created a voluntary spending cap, $6.69 million for down-ticket races and $11.15 for gubernatorial candidates in 2006, and allows every candidate who promises to abide by those limits a ballot statement--at a cost.

The rate of $20 per word was chosen by Secretary of State Bruce McPherson "to recoup production and distribution costs," according to spokeswoman Nghia Nguyen.

McPherson's Democratic opponent in the fall, Sen. Debra Bowen, D-Marina del Rey, declined comment for the story.

Every major-party candidate for office who accepted those spending limits has submitted a statement--except for Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, who is running for insurance commissioner. (full story)

New voting machines questioned

The Sacramento Bee, August 15, 2006

Excerpts:

While the November election marks the first time all counties in California will be in compliance with the federal Help America Vote Act, county elections officials are frustrated with the disabled access component of the law.

Even though state and federal officials allocated millions of dollars to reimburse counties for the cost of new voting machines, some county registrars argue they'll be outdated in a few years, leaving local governments with antiquated systems, millions of dollars in maintenance and replacement costs -- and frustrated voters.

"It's a disaster," said Freddie Oakley, Yolo County registrar. "We're sinking millions, nationwide billions, of dollars into technology that is not ready for the marketplace and that will be obsolete even earlier.

"We are all purchasing gold-plated shovels with rope handles. They look great, but they're not going to do the job for long."

The Help America Vote Act of 2002 requires that counties nationwide replace punch-card systems -- the ones blamed for the problems during the 2000 presidential election -- and that access to voting be improved for disabled voters at every polling location.

--------------

Various advocacy groups and private citizens with disabilities filed a complaint Aug. 1 in U.S. District Court against California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson, as well as registrars in four counties.

The complaint alleges that use of three of the systems violate the 14th Amendment and the Help America Vote Act because voters with disabilities are unable to "vote privately, independently and without assistance like all other voters."

Kim Alexander, president and founder of the Davis-based California Voter Foundation, said the legislation is troublesome because counties have to rely on the few private companies that make the machinery.

"I'm all for free market, but this is an area where we need more government and oversight," she said.

Alexander said she sees a solution in a hybrid voting approach, one that would have high-tech voting centers where there would be trained poll workers to assist people, and those who wish to vote absentee could mail their ballots in or leave them at ballot drop-off sites.

Placer County Registrar of Voters Jim McCauley said the mandated systems come with many unanswered questions, but that doesn't override the premise of the law.

"I think we're all concerned, but there's just no way around it," he said. "I believe everybody has the right to vote." (full story)

Coalition calls for election recount

San Diego Union-Tribune, June 29, 2006

Excerpt:

A coalition of election watchdog organizations is calling on the San Diego County Registrar of Voters to conduct a full manual recount of the June 6 primary election because of alleged security breaches involving touch-screen voting machines.

Specifically, the California Election Protection Network contends the county violated federal and state regulations requiring "secure custody" of voting machines by allowing poll workers to take them home before election day.

--------------

Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, said she shares the California Election Protection Network's concerns about electronic voting equipment, but not the basis of its complaint against San Diego County.

Alexander said the secretary of state's regulations "did not include prohibiting election officials from allowing machines to go home with poll workers before and after an election."

But she added: "I continue to believe we're not ready for electronic voting systems. The fact is these high-tech voting systems are being used in a primitive process and that is a recipe for disaster." (full story)

California Primary Tests Electronic Voting System

The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, June 15, 2006

Excerpt:

SPENCER MICHELS: As director of the nonprofit California Voter Foundation, she spent Primary Election Day trying to find out how well new touch-screen electronic voting machines were working.

KIM ALEXANDER: And what do you think about using the touch-screen voting machines?

VOTER: I think it's wonderful myself.

SPENCER MICHELS: While some voters told her they liked them, Alexander was dismayed by security problems she found.

KIM ALEXANDER: The other polling place I went to had a little sticker there.

POLLING PLACE WORKER: Yes, one of my workers pulled them off. I had it written it down.

KIM ALEXANDER: Oh, how come they pulled it off?

POLLING PLACE WORKER: They didn't know which one they were talking off. It looks like they got the wrong sticker.

KIM ALEXANDER: Oh, which sticker were they supposed to take off?

At this polling place here this morning, they had trouble getting the machines started, and one poll worker told me that they had an anxiety attack and they started tearing all the seals off all of the machines. And three out of the four machines in this polling place do not have those security seals on them right now.

SPENCER MICHELS: Those security seals are designed to prevent tampering by anyone, and that's a concern now that much of the country has switched to electronic voting machines.

The switch was made in response to problems voters had with punch-card voting systems in the disputed and protracted 2000 Florida presidential election. Two years later, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act and appropriated $3.8 billion to buy new voting machines and to otherwise improve elections.

KIM ALEXANDER: A lot of states rushed out and bought new electronic-voting machines thinking that that would solve all of their problems. What we found is that those systems are not only more expensive than paper-voting systems, they're also less transparent and they're hardly glitch-free. (full story, including transcript and audio)

Barnett takes heat for ballot troubles

The Bakersfield Californian, June 8, 2006

Excerpts:

Newly re-elected Kern County Auditor-Controller Ann Barnett was under fire Wednesday after overseeing a bumble-filled election on Tuesday.

"The six-six-six election was one of the worst elections we have had in our county," county Supervisor Michael Rubio said.

Supervisors are calling for control of the Kern County Elections Department to be stripped from Barnett's office.
Barnett said she isn't ready to give up elections, which is tied to separate duties as county clerk, auditor and controller.

"I love every part of my job and I think that, even though we have had bumps along the road, we have done a pretty darn good job," Barnett said.

Elections should be a stand-alone county agency, said Supervisor Don Maben, who was also re-elected Tuesday.

But any attempt to take elections away from Barnett could face serious legal challenges, according to a county memo from February 2005.

--------------

Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, said Kern County allowed poorly handled technology to short-circuit people's right to vote.

"There's no good reason for anyone to be turned away at the polls. Problems are inevitable," she said, but the scale of the problems in Kern County was very troubling.

Alexander's organization advocates for voter rights and has been critical of uncontrolled implementation of new voting technology.

Maben said that next week, he will ask fellow supervisors to draft a letter asking McPherson to take control of the Kern County Elections Department.

Maben said Barnett has proven she should not have control of the county's elections.

"I was one of the guys that stood by her a couple years ago," he said. "I said 'If it's not broke don't fix it.' Well it's broke."

Rubio and Supervisor Jon McQuiston tried to remove elections from Barnett's control in early 2005.

But Maben and Supervisors Barbara Patrick and Ray Watson voted the idea down.

Rubio said the elections process is too critical to be stuck under the authority of the Auditor-Controller's office, which is already responsible for the critical task of auditing the county's mammoth budget.

Everyone needs to answer for Tuesdays' problems, he said.

"The responsibility lies with the person in charge and last night, that was Ann Barnett," Rubio said. But "where the buck ultimately stops is with the Board of Supervisors and that's myself and my four colleagues."(full story)

Tallying the lessons

The Stockton Record, June 8, 2006

Excerpts:

The county's top election official is re-evaluating how democracy is waged in the wake of Tuesday's primary election, which was riddled with voting machine problems and delays.

Before November's general election, in which more voters are expected to decide on more issues, elections officials likely will beef up poll worker training, make sure more tech-support staff is available and could reduce the number of polling locations in order to prevent problems that delayed some polls opening by more than three hours, said Deborah Hench, San Joaquin County's registrar of voters.

"You have to compare it to having the Asparagus Festival in 330 locations," Hench said of the effort to train and deploy poll workers at 333 polling locations spread throughout the county.

Counting the ballots also took longer than in all but six other counties statewide, lasting until 3:28 a.m. Wednesday.

Poll workers complained that the Diebold TSx electronic voting machines used for the first time in two years Tuesday were too difficult to set up and training that the workers received did not adequately explain how to assemble or disassemble the machines.

--------------

"Even with the paper trail, those security concerns are in the hands of poll workers who receive limited training and work 15-hour days," Kim Alexander said Tuesday after surveying polling places in Stockton. "And I think it's too much to ask of people."

Alexander, president of the nonprofit California Voter Foundation, said she saw "a lot of confusion" among poll workers. At some polling locations, she said, voters were not examining paper records of their ballots because they did not know to lift a privacy screen that covers the printouts.

"I wouldn't say that San Joaquin County was a meltdown today, ... but there are many people in this state and this county who are concerned about the security of electronic voting machines, and nothing I saw today eased my concerns," Alexander said.(full story)

California Adds Paper Trail to Electronic Voting

National Public Radio , June 7, 2006

Excerpts:

California's primary election Tuesday was the first serious test for a new kind of electronic voting machine. The devices produce a paper-trail record of every vote cast by touch-screen. The major shift in technology was prompted by concerns that the electronic voting machines the state had been using were vulnerable to fraud.

The reform of California's voting system led it to replace 40,000 paperless voting machines. While resembling the unit it replaced, the new machine has a printer on its side. A voter's choices are printed out, and if they see an anomaly, they can report it, or re-enter their vote.

While the first use of the printer-enabled voting machines reportedly went smoothly, critics of the machine say Tuesday's vote wasn't heavy enough to test the new technology. A key flaw, they said, is that the machine doesn't provide voters with a receipt of their ballot.(full story)

State primary endures minor snags

The Alameda Times-Star, June 7, 2006

Excerpts:

California primaries are among the most complicated elections in the nation, and with elections officials rushing to field the latest voting machinery, Tuesday's races were an invitation for snafus big and small.

There were plenty of those, especially in Kern County, where a technical oversight kept workers from opening many polling places for hours, and in San Joaquin County, where several poll workers never showed up.
A Kern County elections official called the delays "a nightmare," and San Joaquin County Registrar of Voters Debbie Hench said, "It was a hell of a morning."

But viewed statewide, California had no election daymeltdowns — only "minor hiccups," as spokeswoman Nghia Nguyn Demovic of the Secretary of State's Office put it — and the concern was less the mechanics of voting than the voters themselves: Where were they?

Gubernatorial primaries traditionally don't bring out lots of voters. But polling place anecdotes and early returns suggested Tuesday's statewide turnout may have dipped to the historic 2002 low of 36 percent. In 1981, it was 61 percent.

"It's like, 'Oh, my God, it's not there,'" said Contra Costa County clerk and elections chief Steve Weir, who usually sees strong voter participation. "I thought I'd have a 47 percent (turnout), and now I'm thinking 40 percent."

"This one may be the same or lower" than in 2002, said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. "Part of it may be the absence of any hot-button initiatives or candidates on the ballot."

The depressed showing at the polls eased strain on lots of new and experimental voting machinery statewide. In the last two months, elections officials raced to field enormous amounts of new or upgraded voting equipment, mostly to meet changing state and federal laws.(full story)

Diebold machines pressed into service

The Contra-Costa Times, June 6, 2006

Excerpts:

Nearly two years after suing Diebold for faulty, uncertified voting equipment, Alameda County may cast its vote with the Ohio-based company yet again.

County supervisors are scheduled to hold a special meeting Thursday to choose a new voting system expected to be in place for this fall's election. County elections officials are recommending the board choose a "blended" voting system -- consisting of paper ballots with optical scanners, plus a touch screen at each polling place -- made by either Diebold or Oakland-based Sequoia Voting Systems.

Although the new system would be different from the all-touch-screen Diebold system the county embraced five years ago, it could commit the county to contracting with a company that already has left a bad taste in the mouth of voters and county officials alike.

"I am not supportive of Diebold," said Keith Carson, president of the board. "I've said that many times. And at a number of meetings on this topic, the people who speak are in overwhelming opposition to Diebold, too."

The county's relationship with Diebold started in 2001, when the company helped lead a rush to touch-screen voting after the Florida ballot-counting fiasco during the 2000 presidential election.

The county purchased 4,000 Diebold touch-screen machines for $12 million, but the move soon proved troublesome. The equipment had various glitches, including once assigning votes to the wrong candidate.

------------

"There certainly is a rocky history with Diebold and Alameda County," said Kim Alexander, president and founder of the California Voter Foundation. "That history certainly factors into voters' confidence and how secure the public feels with these machines."

Concerns about Diebold have not kept others from using the company's equipment. Twenty counties will use Diebold systems as the primary voting system for today's election. That includes Alameda County -- the only Bay Area county using Diebold -- which is borrowing 50 touch-screen machines and 60 optical scanners from another county since its old Diebold system did not produce a paper record and was rendered inadequate by the state at the beginning of this year.

Both Solano and Contra Costa counties use Election Systems & Software's optical scanners, an option Alameda County officials looked into, but did not recommend because of complaints about the company's support of its systems and references.

"Is there a negative reaction from some people to the name Diebold?" asked David MacDonald, the county's acting registrar. "Clearly, but people are going to have a concern no matter who the maker is."

Alameda County is anticipating buying 1,000 scanners to put at polling places in November, along with 1,000 touch-screen machines to be used mainly by the disabled. The Diebold system could cost as much as $17 million, while the Sequoia system could run as high as $13.5 million. However, Diebold will give the county a $6.1 million trade-in allowance -- stemming from the county's 2001 purchase -- if the county chooses its system. If the county goes with Sequoia, Diebold will buy back its old machines for just $3 million.(full story)

For-profit 'voters guides' called misleading

The San Diego Union-Tribune, June 4, 2006

Excerpts:

Ronald Bonn doesn't belong to a political party, so it probably came as no surprise when the “Official Nonpartisan Voter Guide of California” turned up in his mailbox last week.

In the days leading up to tomorrow's primary, unofficial slate mailers such as this one have flooded mailboxes in California. But Bonn quickly became irate as he examined the card and even checked out its Web site.

The mailer recommended nothing but Republican candidates and the Web site advertised itself as “your first choice in reaching conservative and independent voters.”

“Right-wing skullduggery,” concluded Bonn, who teaches journalism at the University of San Diego.

“It calls itself the 'Official Nonpartisan Voter Guide of California,' which would lead the unwary recipient to believe it is official, nonpartisan and a voter guide,” he wrote in an angry note to The San Diego Union-Tribune. “In fact, it is none of these.”

Jess Durfee was equally incensed when he received the “Voter Information Guide for Democrats.” It recommended Phil Angelides, Dianne Feinstein and a full slate of Democrats for statewide offices and Congress.

The “Voter Information Guide for Democrats” also recommended the re-election of San Diego County Supervisor Ron Roberts, a Republican.

------------

Kim Alexander is president of the California Voter Foundation, whose Web site contains a compendium of voter information. Like many, Alexander admits to having mixed feelings about commercial slates.

She criticizes slate vendors who engage in mercenary and deceptive practices. But she said slates serve a useful purpose in California, where ballots are jammed with candidates for obscure offices that even the most sophisticated voters know next to nothing about.

“I have 22 people I elect to represent me here in Sacramento and I can't tell you who they are and what they do, in some cases,” Alexander said. “And I'm the California Voter Foundation, for crying out loud.”

Tim Hodson, who directs the Center for California Studies at California State University Sacramento, regards slate mailers as a legitimate campaign tool no more subject to abuse than any other.

“It can be useful to a voter who, rationally, doesn't spend a huge amount of time on politics to get a mailer from a political party or organized group that says surfers believe these candidates will support surfer rights,” Hodson said.

Slates are a huge business in California, so much so that some political professionals believe they are losing their impact because of their sheer numbers.(full story)

More voters skip polls, mail ballots

The Contra Costa Times, May 24, 2006

Excerpts:

Contra Costans voting by mail may, for the first time, outnumber those who walk into their polling places June 6.

The trend mirrors a statewide uptick in voting by mail that hits election officials' budgets, alters campaign strategies and inches California closer to a day when it may have to choose between tradition and convenience.

"We're right now in the worst possible combination of both worlds," said Contra Costa County Registrar Steve Weir and incoming president of the California Association of Clerks and Registrars.

"We have to run a full precinct operation, and with the tremendous amount of turnout coming in the mail, I don't have the economy of either scale benefiting us."

Based on absentee ballot return rates thus far, Weir predicted Contra Costa could see mail-in voters overtake Election Day voters for the first time.

If it happens, Weir said, it may foreshadow a tipping point where most Californians vote by mail, and lawmakers may rethink whether it makes sense to deploy a massive and costly Election Day operation.

Like many California counties, the East Bay's vote-by-mail rate has risen steadily since the state's expanded permanent absentee voter program took effect in 2002.

------------

Voting by mail is a convenience for upper- and middle-class voters, Gans said, that hurts the poor and disenfranchises people who may vote before relevant information surfaces about a candidate or an issue. Domineering family members may also exert pressure on spouses to vote their way, he added, which the voting booth privacy precludes.

The more likely outcome, said California Voter Foundation President Kim Alexander, is a hybrid network of convenient, high-tech voting centers coupled with mail voting and improved security at the U.S. Post Office.

"I don't see polling places going away," Alexander said.

"For many people, voting on Election Day is one of the last remaining spaces in public life where people convene and participate in democracy."(full story)

Polls on the move?

The San Bernardino Sun , May 23, 2006

Excerpts:

If voters can't go to the polls, says county Registrar of Voters Kari Verjil, the polls should go to them.
To that end, the mobile-voting vehicle is part of an $8 million package of election equipment up for a vote by the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors at today's meeting.

The board is expected to approve a Help America Vote Act funding agreement with the state, providing the county's Registrar of Voters with funds for upgraded elections equipment, increased voter education and the voting vehicle equipped with touch-screen voting machines.

The county has had plenty of time to think about how to spend the money: It made its request for state funding in 2002.

Verjil said that, assuming the board approves her request, the voting vehicle will likely be rolling through the county before the 2008 state primary.

"We are leaning toward something of a motor-home-type vehicle" similar to the ROVER vehicle that Riverside County operates, Verjil said. The portable-polling places would be dispatched to senior centers, civic events and remote areas of the county during the three weeks of early voting leading up to election day.

------------

San Bernardino County has a mixed record with electronic voting, said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a voting-rights watchdog group.

"The county was one of the first in the state to implement a voter-verified paper-trail printer on all of their electronic-voting machines," Alexander said. "That happened even before the law took effect."

But that's not to say the county's Election Day operations haven't hiccupped in the past, she said.

In a March 2004 election, an error by the registrar's office forced the county to start counting the electronic ballots over, delaying the release of results by several hours.

And in 2001, the office announced erroneous results in 13 local races after it failed to adequately test a machine that tabulated paper ballots.

Those problems occurred before her time and before the county had its current safeguards in place, Verjil said.

"I would be confident to vote in San Bernardino County," Verjil said. "From the past elections I've seen, voters are becoming comfortable with the units, and I've had nothing but positive response with the Voter Verification Audit Trail."

That voters take advantage of the opportunity to confirm the accuracy of their vote is crucial, Alexander said.

"In light of the history of corruption at the local level in San Bernardino County, it's important for voters to be vigilant about any voting system the county uses," Alexander said. "Voters everywhere in e-voting counties can help ensure the security of the systems by carefully checking their ballot."(full story)

Enlisting Internet's aid

The Orange County Register, May 22, 2006

Excerpts:

Having trouble understanding Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's proposed state budget for 2006-07? Or the whopping public works package Californians will vote on in November? The governor is happy to explain it all – via the Internet.

His administration has launched six taxpayer-funded Web sites in recent months to help people navigate the complexities of his proposals. The sites employ a blend of popular Internet fare, including videos of his speeches and Web logs by his advisers, all at catchphrase Web addresses like buildingabettercalifornia.com.

Each site is devoted to a single subject matter and the writing is anything but government-speak. Under "The Bloginator" – a name recycled from last year's special-election campaign Web site – Finance Director Mike Genest compares the $7.5 billion in extra revenues flowing into state coffers over two years to a surprise increase in a California family's tax refund, and asks, "So sitting around the kitchen table, what do you decide to with this unexpected windfall?"

------------
His sites are part of a growing nationwide trend that political experts say was born with the success of Howard Dean, a little known, former Vermont governor who used the Internet to leap onto the national stage as a Democratic presidential contender in 2004.

Dozens of similar official Web pages are used by leaders in other states and often bear the similar, nonofficial Web addresses.

"The fact is that the (Schwarzenegger) staff are using the Internet in creative ways to provide information that is beneficial to the people of California," said Kim Alexander, founder of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation.(full story)

Voting system decision delayed

The Argus, May 18, 2006

Excerpts:

Facing a use-it-or-lose-it situation on $9 million in federal money, Alameda County supervisors put off choosing a new voting system Wednesday night under pressure from voting activists.

The county largely has ended its three-year experiment as the first big West Coast jurisdiction to gamble on Diebold and its electronic touch-screen voting machines. The question is what is next, and when?

County executives pressed supervisors Wednesday night to settle on a "blended" voting system supplied by either Diebold or Oakland-based Sequoia Voting Systems, with primarily paper ballots run through optical scanners, plus a touch-screen at each polling place to guarantee accessibility for disabled voters.

The price tag is $13 million to $17 million, and with a budget deficit already on the horizon, county officials are eager to use federal grants for more than half the purchase. The grants come with conditions and tight deadlines.
"I know this has been a longand painful process," David McDonald, the county's information technology director and interim elections chief, told the supervisors. "One thing I'm positive of is we're running out of time."

But some voting activists say the urgency is manufactured and that they prefer waiting on better, more secure voting systems, even if it means losing federal grant money.

Throughout the nation, counties are in the same boat. By year end, they must weigh cost, accuracy, security and accessibility across a handful of imperfect voting systems or risk forfeiting millions in federal dollars.

------------

Activists point to recent discoveries of security holes in Diebold optical scanning systems and touch-screens, such as one first reported last week by The Argus, which computer scientists have called the worst vulnerability ever found in a voting system.

County officials and their consultants did not weigh the various voting systems for security and transparency, as many activists wished, but primarily for cost and compliance with state and federal laws.

Alameda County officials say they still are countering those security weaknesses by locking up or sealing the voting machines with tamper-evident tape. State law also requires a hand count of ballots in 1 percent of precincts as a check on the machine counts. The county plans on doubling that, for a hand tally of 2 percent.

Jessica Lehman, a representative for the disability group Community Resources for Independent Living, said no voting system offers everything — complete security, full accessibility and transparency.

But, she told county supervisors, "We have decent machines out there. We need to get them out so everyone has a chance to vote."

To buy machines for November, county executives say they need to sign a purchase contract in early June. Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, said a small delay could be a good idea and give Alameda County a look at how the various voting systems perform in the June 6 primary.(full story)

In secretary of state primary race it's a Debra vs. a Deborah

The Daily Breeze, May 15, 2006

Excerpts:

They hold down the same job, belong to the same political party and even have similar first names.

So it's no surprise that state Sens. Debra Bowen and Deborah Ortiz are working to strike distinct chords with Democrats in a low-key primary campaign to be California's elections chief.

"In many respects, we are alike," said Ortiz, of Sacramento. "What distinguishes us is independence."

Bowen, of Marina del Rey, said it's her experience pushing election reforms that sets her apart.

"These are the issues I've worked on in the Legislature," Bowen said.

There are major divisions, however. The two Democrats part ways on same-day registration and whether voters should cast ballots on weekends. While Bowen has zeroed in on elections and privacy, Ortiz's career is marked more by health issues.

The survivor of the June 6 primary will go up against incumbent Secretary of State Bruce McPherson, a Republican and former state senator appointed by the governor to serve out the term of Democrat Kevin Shelley, who resigned amid scandal 14 months ago.

------------

The secretary of state is primarily responsible for upholding the integrity of the ballot box for nearly 17 million voters in 58 counties.

"The secretary of state decides whether voting systems are safe," said Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation.

"It's such an important function that many states don't have it (elections) as part of the secretary of state. They have a separate elections board," she said.

Beyond the elections division, the secretary of state maintains a vast online database of campaign contributions and lobbyist earnings.

The site helps the public track where money is being spent to influence elections as well as legislation and holds a trove of elections data. The office also runs California's domestic partners registry and is the keeper of many corporate filings.

Like many other statewide races, the secretary of state campaign features a pair of entrenched Democrats about to be booted out of the Legislature by term limits. Bowen, 50, and Ortiz, 49, are in their eighth and final year in the Senate.(full story)

Santa Clara Co. Introduces Electronic Voting Paper Audit Trail

CBS 5, San Francisco, May 12, 2006

Excerpts:

The Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters demonstrated an upgraded version of the Sequoia Electronic Voting System Thursday, which for the first time includes a paper audit trail that allows users to verify the accuracy of their selections in print.

The Direct Recording Electronic voting machines used by the county since 2003 have been modified to include the new VeriVote printers, which store a voter-verified paper audit trail, called VVPAT.

Efforts to reinstate voter confidence in the electronic voting process brought about the now state-mandated requirement that all ballots cast leave a record on paper. The law, passed in 2004, took effect Jan. 1 and will be applied for the first time at the June 6 gubernatorial election.

"The VVPAT will let voters see on paper that their ballot is being recorded correctly, and it will also serve as a back-up record of the vote that can be used to conduct manual recounts," Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters Jesse Durazo said.

------------

Election officials are not allowed to interfere with or open the VeriVote printers, which are equipped with a security seal in the back that reads void if tampered with. If a printer malfunctions, an inspector would replace it at the precinct. The votes already cast would remain in the box for storage.

Durazo said that preliminary numbers indicate the printers are capable of storing 300 votes each. In addition to the VeriVote printers, the ballots are also stored in the DRE machines and a computer cartridge, leaving the registrar of voters with three back-up memory locations.

"Even if we lost power, there are redundant votes captured in our memory bank," Durazo said.

The new system is a step in the right direction, according to the California Voter Foundation, a nonprofit organization that has fought for a paper trail requirement since the electronic voting machines were introduced.

"California's June primary ushers in a new era of accountability and transparency in state elections," Kim Alexander, president and founder of the California Voter Foundation, said in a statement released last week. "Election officials rely on proprietary software produced by private companies to count the votes. The voter verified paper trail requirement ensures that election officials have a meaningful, independent audit trail to use when they publicly verify the vote."(full story)

Absentee ballots popular as June 6 primary approaches

The Record, May 11, 2006

Excerpts:

A growing number of voters are signing up to cast their ballots early in this year's elections as political parties stress the benefits of voting by mail.

With the primary election less than a month away, both major parties are trying to sign up new voters before a May 22 deadline and make sure those already registered get to the polls or send in their absentee ballots, which should be hitting mailboxes over the next few days.

Democrats and Republicans have been pushing for voters to register permanent absentee - meaning they receive ballots in the mail several weeks early and have until the day of the election to return them - believing that will make people more likely to vote and allow them time to study the candidates they're choosing and the issues they're deciding.

------------

The number of permanent absentee voters has increased dramatically since voters could begin registering to vote by mail for any reason in 2002; prior to a new law being passed, voters had to give a reason why they couldn't go to the polls, such as a disability, to register permanent absentee. Leading up to the 2004 primary, there were 42,202 permanent absentee voters, Hench said.

But a statewide study released last year by the California Voter Foundation found more than half of infrequent voters - those who have voted in no more than one of the previous four elections - are not familiar with how to vote absentee.

"I think that indicates that there's a lot of education to be done," said Kim Alexander, president of the foundation. "There's a whole additional universe of voters who could greatly benefit from absentee voting."(full story)

Immigrant activists focus on political participation

The Daily Bulletin, May 8, 2006

Excerpts:

Even as Latinos in recent weeks have pushed for immigration reform on the streets and over the airwaves, another goal has emerged among a broader immigrant community: Translating street activism into political participation.

Latino and Asian civic groups last week reignited voter-registration drives by calling upon the thousands who participated in protests to take their enthusiasm to the ballot box in November.

But experts said that if history serves as any guide, short-term gains are likely to be few, while long-term gains will be significant.

‘‘If the next step and what we are seeing in the streets moves toward citizenship, voter turnout and registration, if that has any kind of legs beyond this year it will make California the darkest shade of blue possible and give rise to more Latino candidates at all levels,'' said Jaime Regalado, executive director of the Pat Brown Institute at California State University, Los Angeles.

Such is the case in California where, since January 1, nearly 25 percent of voter registration forms submitted for verification have been rejected by the statewide database. In Los Angeles County, 43 percent of voter registrations have been rejected.

------------

‘‘This will have an effect on turnout on registration if there is a convincing case that there is threatening legislation against the community,'' said Karthick Ramakrishnan, an assistant professor of political science at the University of California, Riverside, and author of ‘‘Democracy in Immigrant America.''

But although register rolls could spike, turning voters out may prove difficult in upcoming state elections where new voters, both Latino and Asians, cannot clearly see their issues spelled out as they did in 1994, he said.

And organizers will continue to face challenges registering immigrants, which proportionally vote less than their white counterparts, partly because of what a 2005 California Voter Foundation survey suggests is a lack of ‘‘a pro-voting culture.''

Statewide, only 30 percent of Latinos eligible to vote are registered, according to the William C. Velasquez Institute, a think tank examining Latino voting trends. That compares to 72 percent of all whites and 68 percent all blacks.

Latino and Asian populations are heavily dominated by immigrants. Nationally, about 64 percent of Asians are foreign born as are 40 percent of Latinos, compared to just 3 percent of whites, according to a 1994 study by the Urban Institute on Latino and Asian Voters.

‘‘The population of the state is growing young and more diverse but the electorate has been stagnate, it continues to be those that are older, white and better educated that are voting. Those trends can be turned around and they need to be turned around,'' said Kim Alexander, president of the foundation, a non-profit group that tracks voting trends.

Even in areas like Los Angeles where Latinos played a pivotal role last year in electing Villaraigosa to the city's helm, they turned out in far lower numbers than the general voting population.(full story)

Changes behind scenes in voting

The Argus, May 5, 2006

Excerpts:

Most voters in California will not see much of a difference, but behind the scenes many counties are fielding new or upgraded voting machinery for the 2006 elections.

Gone is the punch-card ballot that, until 2000, was a mainstay of California polling places. For voters with disabilities, local elections officials are trying new blends of voting machinery to meet federal law on accessibility.
But in the biggest change, every county for the first time will have a paper ballot or backup record of votes as insurance against inaccuracy, fraud or breakdown of computerized voting systems. That means voters will see printers and paper, and lots of them.

This year, California will become the first entire state to have such a backup record, said Kim Alexander, a paper-trail proponent and president of the nonprofit California Voter Foundation.

"Election officials rely on proprietary software produced by private companies to count the votes," Alexander said in a statement. "The voter verified paper trail requirement ensures that election officials have a meaningful, independent audit trail to use when they publicly verify the vote."

According to data collected by the foundation and released Thursday, 18 counties are putting new voting systems before voters in the primary this June. Most are swapping optically scanned paper ballots or punch cards for electronic, touch-screen voting machines that meet state and federal laws requiring paper trails and unassisted voting for people with disabilities.

--------------

Yolo County planned on buying ES&S' accessible ballot-marking devices, known as AutoMarks and selling for about $5,000 each. But contract negotiations soured, and Yolo officials instead are using VotePad, a series of plastic ballot-marking booklets that come with an audiocassette guide for the voter.

State elections officials question the legality of the idea, since the VotePad has not formally been certified for use in California.

"I think it's a clever work-around," said Alexander of the California Voter Foundation. "I think a lot of counties are just trying to get through one election at a time. They're using this election to try out a system without making a long-term commitment to one system or vendor."

In many counties, manufacturers now are racing to deliver new software, new or rebuilt machines or new parts such as the printers that will supply paper trails for touch-screen voting machines. Warehouses where voting machines are stored are hives of activity these days, testing the newly arrived equipment and getting it programmed for the June 6 election.

"It truly is chaos out there," said Tom Stanionis, director of technology for the Yolo County clerk/recorder's office.
But two-thirds of the counties, including most of the large ones, are sticking with or returning to optical scanners, upgraded to the latest version.

"They are trying to play it safe. They don't want to be the guinea pigs," said Alexander. "There are some who are willing to experiment with the accessibility requirements, but they're mostly sticking with the systems they're familiar with."

Many elections officials also are eyeing the rise in absentee voting, already close to 50 percent in the Bay Area, and all of those votes are optically scanned.(full story)

Database Troubles Arise in California, Elsewhere

electionline.org, April 13, 2006

Excerpts:

While much of the recent election hand-wringing has focused on documented and potential problems with voting systems, recent troubles in several states have shifted some of the focus to another major election change – newly implemented statewide voter registration databases.

The voter lists, mandated by the Help America Vote Act with the aim to eliminate voter registration problems related to inaccurate or haphazard rolls, have raised concerns that list problems in some states could potentially disenfranchise large numbers of voters.

Thousands of registration applications rejected in California

Such is the case in California where, since January 1, nearly 25 percent of voter registration forms submitted for verification have been rejected by the statewide database. In Los Angeles County, 43 percent of voter registrations have been rejected.

In a letter to Secretary of State Bruce McPherson (R), Conny McCormack, L.A. County registrar-recorder/county clerk cited several examples of some of the thousands of applications rejected by the “CalVoter” system. They included some forms being rejected because of spaces in last names, such as "De Leon," or a last name that is two words with no hyphen, such as "Weaver Cardona." Some new residents had applications rejected because the DMV records CalVoter uses for verification can be up to six months old.

“The challenge of setting up a statewide voter registration database that complies with HAVA requirements has been well-known to election administrators and activists for years,” said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. “This particular problem that California is experiencing is a result of the terms of an agreement made between the Secretary of State and the Department of Justice that is unique to California and a handful of other states. This form rejection problem itself is a surprise that I don’t think anyone anticipated.”(full story)

State working to address rejected voters

The San Jose Mercury News, April 4, 2006

Excerpts:

Elections officials around the state say thousands of voters may not receive ballots before the June 6 election because they have incorrectly filled out or omitted information from their registration forms.

In January, a new federal law took effect to combat fraud, requiring voters to provide their driver's license or state ID numbers or, absent those, the last four digits of their Social Security numbers.

Eligible voters who have had their forms rejected can still go to the polls with identification, but will receive a provisional ballot -- often counted weeks after the election.

About one-quarter of those who registered or re-registered this year have been rejected statewide, the Associated Press reported. When a state database kicks back the registration form, local election offices have the extra burden of contacting voters to get the information.

Under pressure from election officials and voter advocates, California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson said last week he would push for a compromise that would eliminate that step by matching voters' names with records from the Department of Motor Vehicles.

--------------

Voting groups hope lawmakers can push through the emergency legislation in time for the June primary.

``It's the kind of issue that can bring legislators together in a bipartisan way,'' said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. ``It's in their best interest to resolve it quickly.''

The move to strengthen identity verification is another phase of the federal 2002 Help America Vote Act. Congress passed the law in response to the Florida recount debacle during the 2000 presidential election.

It's ironic that a law to improve voter integrity could actually discourage some people from going to the polls, Alexander said.

The law ``was intended to ensure voters would not be unfairly disenfranchised. Here's an unintended consequence,'' she said. ``It's a fine line to walk. You want to make sure that as many people as possible can vote and you want to make sure there is integrity in the process.''(full story)

Ventura County Plugs Hole in Voting System With Ink

Los Angeles Times, March 25, 2006

Excerpts:

Ventura County election officials are replacing their decades-old punch-card voting system in time for the June 6 primary election.

After more than 30 years of voting with punch cards, most county voters will now mark their choices with ink. Those who have trouble seeing the ballots or using the pens will be able to vote on computer touch screens.

County officials say their new systems will serve Spanish-speaking voters better and ensure that those who are disabled can cast secret ballots.

The county has used punch-card technology for more than three decades, but officials agreed in 2004 to replace the system under a federal consent decree.

The U.S. Department of Justice had accused the county of discriminating against Latinos, who make up about a third of the population, by failing to employ sufficient numbers of bilingual poll workers or to provide adequate Spanish-language voting materials.

---------------

California passed a law in 2004 requiring electronic ballot machines to also use some form of paper verification. Counties have until June 2006 to comply.

To meet the deadline, Riverside County in January agreed to spend $14.2 million to replace its 6-year-old touch-screen voting machines with newer models that provide paper confirmation.

By never abandoning paper-based voting, Ventura County showed its fiscal prudence, said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation.

"Counties that go all electronic typically spend three times more to purchase new equipment," Alexander said.(full story)

New CA Lawsuit Against Diebold's Electronic Voting Machines

Government Technology, March 24, 2006

Reprinted from Kim Alexander's Weblog.

On Tuesday, the nonprofit group Voter Action filed a lawsuit against California's Secretary of State Bruce McPherson as well as eighteen counties for certifying and using voting equipment made by Diebold. The lead attorney on the lawsuit is Lowell Finley, who previously brought a successful case against Diebold on behalf of Bev Harris and Jim March of Black Box Voting. That case was joined by California Attorney General Bill Lockyer and Alameda County, and settled out of court for $2.6 million. (See my November 11, 2004 blog entry for details on the settlement).

Given Mr. Finley's track record, it's worthwhile to pay attention to his claims, which include that the equipment in question, the Diebold TSX electronic voting machine (with voter-verified paper audit trail printer) does not adequately meet the needs of disabled voters, nor does it meet the current, 2002 federal voting system standards, which prohibit the use of interpreted code in voting equipment software.

Other compelling claims include one that the voter-verified paper record produced by the the TSx cannot fulfill the demands of California's one percent manual count law, which is designed to publicly verify the accuracy of software vote counts, and another that counties are circumventing the one percent rule by omitting absentee and early-voting ballots in the manual count. Voter Action has provided the legal documents filed today on its web site. See this AP story by David Kravets for more details.

County tries to develop voting plan

The Argus, March 15, 2006

Excerpts:

Four years after buying new Diebold voting machines for $12 million, Alameda County is headed back into the market to negotiate for as much as $17.8 million of new voting machinery.

With an impassioned debate spanning two days, county supervisors anguished over sagging public confidence in voting and uncertainty in the technology, then found themselves divided about how to handle elections for coming years.

"This is not the purchasing of a new vehicle fleet," said board President Keith Carson, "this is fundamental to all the rights of every citizen in the county."

"There's too many unknown things," said Supervisor Gail Steele. "This $17 million is a huge amount of money with the uncertainty that we have."

But when the county's elections chief warned that delays could trigger new federal requirements and force the county to fill its polling places with more electronic-voting equipment, Alice Lai-Bitker joined Supervisors Nate Miley and Scott Haggerty in pressing ahead with purchase negotiations.

"There's a consequence to waiting," said acting Registrar of Voters Elaine Ginnold. "If we're going to change voting systems, we have to change now, so we can train voters and workers."

County elections and contracts officials say they will negotiate with Allen, Texas-based Diebold Election Systems Inc. and Oakland-based Sequoia Voting Systems, the two voting-machine makers rated highest by a panel of voting advocates, residents and county officials. The winning company would provide a system that principally handles paper ballots with optical ballot scanners plus two, ATM-like touch-screen voting machines in each polling place such as those the county uses now, the latter to meet federal mandates for handicapped-accessible voting equipment. The touch screens would print a backup record of the electronic ballot for voters to check and elections workers to use in recounts.

--------------

Others said any voting system using commercial, proprietary software to count ballots is unacceptable, and only paper ballots, counted by hand, would be trustworthy.

"How could you even consider Diebold? Diebold is well-known (to be) partisan." said activist Phoebe Sorgen. "It's a $17.8 million scam. Please say no to the machines that count our ballots in secret."

Ginnold, the elections chief, said if the county failed to buy its planned "hybrid" system of mostly optical scanners by January 2007, the federal Help America Vote Act would require any new system be fully accessible to disabled voters. In general, that would mean every machine in every polling place would have to be a touch screen, she said.

Negotiating for a new system "essentially leaves us more options," said Haggerty. "We need to advance into the future."

What the law actually says is that after January 2007, no federal funds may be used to purchase new voting systems that are not fully accessible to disabled voters.

"That statement took some options off the table that several supervisors wanted to consider," said Kim Alexander, president of the nonprofit California Voter Foundation. "This board in Alameda has put more into trying to understand this issue than any other board in the state. They asked good questions, and I'm not convinced they got good answers."(full story)

Incumbents depend on gerrymandering to save their jobs

Capitol Hill Blue, February 26, 2006

Excerpts:

While technically all 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives are up for grabs in November, handicappers expect a mere 33 to be competitive, in part because many incumbents already have picked the voters they hope will return them to office.
Across the country, lawmakers will run for re-election in bizarrely shaped congressional districts carefully drawn to include voters who support them and exclude those who don't.

In Chicago, Democratic Rep. Luis Gutierrez will face voters in several Hispanic neighborhoods but not the predominantly black neighborhood that sits between them.

South of the city, Republican Rep. Jerry Weller's parents will get a chance to vote for their son, whose district was redrawn five years ago to encompass their house.

Critics of the practice known as gerrymandering -- named for Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry, a master of tortuous redistricting two centuries ago -- say it produces a legislative body that doesn't accurately represent the country.

"We now have a system where too often our representatives are selecting their voters rather than voters selecting their representatives," Illinois Democratic Sen. Barack Obama said at a recent conference on election reform.

-----------

In most cases, the party that controls the state legislature runs the show. Democrats in Maryland gained two congressional seats in 2002 after they drew the state's political boundaries to their advantage. In Michigan, Republicans who redrew their state map picked up three seats that year.

In states where neither party has a clear advantage, such as Illinois, leaders often work out a compromise that protects as many incumbents as possible.

"Every legislator knows where their political strengths are, where the greatest number of votes comes from, and with the ability to draw the maps themselves they can carve out districts that are very precisely drawn to favor their future political interests," said Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundatiion.(full story)

Campaign disclosure forms trickling onto the Internet

Charleston Post Courier, January 11, 2006

Excerpts:

A quick click on "Sanford, Marshall" on the new State Ethics Commission Web site brings up the campaign disclosures for the governor's race listed by itemized contributions of cash and services, expenses and loans.

Candidates are required to file the forms every quarter, and until the online system was unveiled Tuesday, most of them filed hand-written forms.

-------------

Ethics Commission Director Herb Hayden said the online system is in the first of two phases of development.

In this first phase, visitors to the Web site can view filings for 21 candidates for statewide offices, including attorney general, lieutenant governor, secretary of state and treasurer.

By early next year, phase two of the project will make the records available for every candidate at the county and municipal level.

According to Hayden, the system is being run by South Carolina Interactive, the same company that builds systems for paying taxes or renewing driver's licenses online.

Since 2003, The California Voter Foundation's Campaign Disclosure Project has given South Carolina an "F" for the lack of online availability for even the most basic state campaign disclosure information.

This was enough to garner a 2005 ranking of 49th out of 50 states, above only Wyoming.

After an initial look, Saskia Mills, executive director of the foundation, said she was impressed.

She wanted more searchable data, but Mills doubted her group would give the state an "F" next year.(full story)

Paper trail law for e-voting has fans, foes

San Francisco Chronicle, January 10, 2006

Excerpts:

California will require all electronic voting machines to produce a printed record of votes in the June election, but there are still concerns that the expensive overhaul may cause more problems than it solves.

The Pacific Research Institute, a free-market think tank, has called the paper trail requirement one of the state's top 10 policy blunders of 2005. The new law "may force California to relive the mistakes of America's punch-card voting past,'' the group said, and will make voting "increasingly difficult and negate the original virtues of e-voting: speed, cost-savings and efficiency.''

"We're moving in the wrong direction,'' said Sonia Arrison, director of technology studies for the institute. "The whole point of e-voting is to move away from paper.''

In a briefing paper written last year, Arrison and Vince Vasquez, a fellow at the institute, argued that a system of printouts that allows voters to verify their choices and election officials to do a physical recount to confirm the results is not the perfect solution its supporters proclaim.

"Passing sweeping laws ... to require voter-verified paper trails for touch-screen machines, though well-intentioned, could bankrupt cash-strapped counties and may erode the efficiency of electronic voting management,'' they said in the paper.

Arrison and the institute are swimming against the tide. Growing concerns about the vulnerability of the complex electronic voting systems to hacking, electronic glitches and simple errors by local election officials have persuaded an increasing number of states to require paper backups for election results.

--------------

"We've created a system where the oversight of elections is by private companies, and that's not acceptable in a democracy,'' said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. Without a paper verification system, "you're at the mercy of the vendor to tell you who won and who lost.''

Despite concerns about the power of the voting machine manufacturers, there's been no evidence that an electronic voting machine was ever hacked or election results purposely changed.

"These same people worried about electronic voting machines are perfectly fine using an ATM machine or being in an airplane that uses computers for everything,'' Arrison said. "Experts know how (voting machines) can be hacked, but they also know it's not as dire as it's made out to be.''

The paper backup systems come with problems of their own, Arrison said. In a special test of electronic voting machines in Stockton in July, officials from the California secretary of state's office ran 10,000 ballots through 96 printer-equipped machines from Diebold Election Systems. The results weren't encouraging.

More than 20 percent of the machines had problems, including 10 with paper jams or other printer problems. The results convinced Secretary of State Bruce McPherson to deny certification of the voting system.

While McPherson has been a longtime supporter of paper verification, he has listened to concerns about the program and is keeping a close watch on the performance of the printing systems, said Jennifer Kerns, a spokeswoman for the secretary of state.

"The secretary has a duty to uphold the law that requires a paper trail for voting and helps counties enforce that requirement,'' she said. "But he's heard media reports on both sides of the issue. ... He's in the position of being the referee.''(full story)

Del. unveils online campaign finance filing

The News Journal, January 9, 2006

Excerpts:

Election officials hope an improved electronic filing system will lead to more online filings of campaign contribution reports from candidates and political action committees this year.

State Election Commissioner Frank Calio said the new system will be available for candi