  |
|
| State and Local Election Integrity Organizations | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
 |
|
| City Council to Board of Elections:Show Us New Voting Machines Work & What They Cost Before Buying |
|
|
|
| By Teresa Hommel, WheresThePaper.org, Chair, Task Force on Election Integrity, Community Church of NY | |
| August 20, 2006 | |
|
The New York City Council has requested that the City Board of Elections perform specific public tests before it selects new voting machines to comply with the federal Help America Vote Act of 2002. A resolution detailing the Council's recommendations had bipartisan support and passed by unanimous vote on Wednesday, August 16, 2006. The tests recommended for each voting system under consideration included: • Complete Mock Elections. The Council believed that this was the only way to ensure that entire voting systems work AND that elections staff, poll workers and voters would be able to work with them.The Council also called for: • Analysis of acquisition, transition, and continuing costs for both optical scanner and DRE systems."Today the Council stands united in demanding public input and accountability to safeguard the most basic right of our democratic society--the right to vote," said Councilmember Robert Jackson, Lead Sponsor. "We expect the Board of Elections to heed our call to preserve the integrity of our voting system as we move towards electronic voting. All New Yorkers must be confident that their voice is heard in the voting booth." Alexander Wood, Executive Director of Disabilities Network of New York City, agreed. "Accessibility and security are two equally essential requirements for any new voting system, and [we believe] that the tests listed in Resolution 228-A are needed to ensure that that’s what we get," he said. "We were in full support of the reauthorization of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and feel that passage of Resolution 228-A by the City Council would be a big step toward selecting the best voting machines to ensure that the votes of the people are properly recorded and counted," said Edward Josey, President of the Staten Island Branch of the NAACP. Resolution Had Broad Support Prior to the day of passage, 43 of 51 council members were sponsors of the resolution. Such a high number of sponsors is historic and almost unprecedented. Several Councilmembers helped gather support for the resolution, especially Simcha Felder, Chairman of the Governmental Operations Committee. He held several hearings in which the resolution was debated, and he helped bring it to a vote by the entire council. More than a dozen good government groups supported the resolution. Most of them rallied at an enthusiastic press conference on the steps of City Hall just prior to the vote: American Association of Jews from the Former USSR, New York Chapter; Center for Independence of the Disabled, New York (CIDNY); Common Cause/New York; Disabilities Network of New York City; Election Integrity Task Force of Community Church of NY; Joint Public Affairs Committee for Older Adults (JPAC); League of Women Voters of New York City; NAACP Staten Island Branch; New York Public Interest Research Group, Inc. NYPIRG; New York Statewide Senior Action Council; New Yorkers for Verified Voting NYVV.org; People For the American Way; Professional Staff Congress (PSC-CUNY); and The New York Immigration Coalition. Activism and Opposition Resolutions are tools for public education and activism. Unless citizens advocate for the recommendations in this resolution to be implemented, it will probably be ignored. For example, two days after the resolution passed, a spokeswoman for the Board of Elections told a reporter that she did not know it had passed. Although resolutions are not law and do not obligate the Board of Elections to comply, the Board opposed the resolution. The conflict was noted by The Crain’s Insider. Arguments in opposition were (1) the resolution is not necessary; (2) it will not obligate the Board of Elections so it is useless; and (3) as Citizens Union stated in their testimony before the Governmental Operations Committee in April, 2006: "[W]e believe the technicalities of this legislation are outside the scope of jurisdiction of this governmental body. The specificities provided in this legislation are advocated irregardless to the capabilities and resources of the City Board. The City Council should not legislate the work and decisions of the City Board of Elections. It is these circumstances when one branch of government inappropriately overreaches to influence the decision of another separate governmental entity, when government is no longer good." Why are these arguments wrong? 1. As elected officials, City Council Members are representatives of the people. It is their job and responsibility to express the concerns and the will of the people. The Board of Elections is a politically appointed body with no obligation to meet with or listen to the people. 2. Although resolutions are "legislation" in a broad sense, they are not law, and no resolution is outside the jurisdiction of the City Council. The City Council passes resolutions on national and state issues on subjects where the Council is "pre-empted" by national or state law. In New York State, state election law pre-empts local law, which means that if the City Council would pass a law rather than a resolution, it would be struck down by the courts. 3. Computerized voting systems offer nearly infinite opportunities for undetectable errors and tampering. The City Board of Elections, although eager to get computerized voting, has not yet shown realistic plans for managing the technology in a secure or responsible way: a. No public hearings to date. 4. If the resolution calls for measures that are in fact beyond the "capabilities and resources of the City Board" then the City Council performed an essential public service by clearly and explicitly listing the measures that are reasonable and necessary to ensure safe and proper use of computerized voting systems.
Documents Available Comment on This Article
You must login to leave comments...
Other Visitors Comments
There are no comments currently....
|
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
| |
|