           |
1/25/2006
- Status of Pennsylvania’s HAVA Compliance
From: Bonita
Hoke, Executive Director, LWVPA, bchoke@palwv.org
Highlights
of the 1.25.06 House State Government Committee Meeting Featuring Testimony
from PA Department of State Secretary of the Commonwealth Pedro Cortes
Subjects covered by Cortes
were: status of the Voting System Examination and Certification, Voter
Verified Voting, and the Statewide Uniform Registry of Electors (SURE).
- Since September, the Department
has certified seven additional Help America Vote Act (HAVA)-compliant
voting systems, making for a total of eight in the state.
- Sourcing To Achieve Reductions
in Spending (COSTARS) contract was issued by the DGS to allow counties
to purchase voting systems.
- Voter Verified Paper Audit
Trails (VVPAT) and Voter Verified Paper Ballots VVPB). While not opposed,
the Department of State is concerned that the VVPAT/VVPB systems currently
on the market either violate the PA Constitution and PA Election Code,
or at the least present technical and administrative challenges.
- December 26, 2005, Philadelphia
went live as part of the SURE program, meaning PA has met the federal
mandated deadline of January 1, 2006, with all 67 counties in the state
now using SURE as their official record of voter registry.
- Question: Chairman Clymer
asked if each of the seven HAVA systems that were recently approved
have the ability to provide paper trails. Secretary Cortes replied that
each system can reproduce images of votes.
- The Chairman asked Cortes
to comment on the fact that some people feel the systems are not foolproof.
Cortes explained the issue is that the paper audit trail capability
is mechanical, and can only be accessed by election officials. It is
not the same, he emphasized, as immediate paper verification that a
vote has been tallied and submitted correctly. He added the Department
is confident the machines are safe and secure.
- Chairman Clymer wondered
what would happen if a number of counties all purchase systems from
the same manufacturers, who then encountered supply and delivery problems.
Secretary Cortes explained that if counties are unable to comply by
May, it will result in PA having to return money to the federal government.
As far as the practical aspect of how votes would be recorded, the Secretary
offered that counties would have to resort to existing voting methods,
paper ballots, or consider leasing voting systems. He stated that if
the state takes every step to move toward compliance, there should not
be a problem.
- Rep. Gingrich observed
that in Lebanon County, officials made the decision to go with a particular
system because of certification holdups at the federal level of other
more suitable systems. The county has since been told that maybe 50%
of the units that were ordered will actually be delivered. Secretary
Cortes explained that in the event a county can only get a portion of
the necessary equipment, the law requires that a minimum of one HAVA-compliant
unit must be present at each voting precinct. Rep. Gingrich asked if
the Secretary could explain why the equipment her district had wanted
as its first choice was not federally approved. Cortes referred to testimony
provided by Douglas Hill, Executive Director of the County Commissioners
Association of PA, and explained that PA law provides that before any
systems can be used, they must be federally approved. He added that
seven systems have not been certified yet, of which two have been denied
while the remaining five are being held up by federal inaction.
- Democratic Chair Josephs
commended the Secretary and his department for getting every county
in the state on SURE. She noted concern over the citizens who run polling
places, explaining that many are elderly and added she would like to
see discussion about what will happen to these people as polling centers
move toward electronic systems.
- Rep. Youngblood commented
that in Philadelphia, her ward has moved to an electronic voting system.
She explained the machines have cartridges that are picked up. She asked
what kind of feedback the Department has received from other wards in
city. Secretary Cortes explained that the cartridge system, in effect
a manual audit, is only used when questions regarding votes arise. He
offered that the feedback he as received from the Director of Administration
in Philadelphia has been quite positive, and noted the electronic system
is working better than the old paper one. He went on, explaining every
machine is tested prior to an election, but cautioned that they are
machines, and sometimes do break. The Secretary remarked Philadelphia
is the only county fully compliant with HAVA thus far.
- Rep. Gabig asked if Philadelphia
is indeed the only county that is compliant. Secretary Cortes stated
the other 66 counties are not yet in compliance, but added the procurement
process is ongoing and counties have until May 16th to comply. Rep.
Gabig explained Cumberland County's system is an optical design several
years old. He described a mix-up at the recent election of a district
judge which resulted in backwards results, and commented how such errors
do not provide great confidence in the systems. He expressed hope that
the state is going to have the authority to ensure mistakes are minimal
and correctable. Rep. Gabig asked if it is possible, under SURE, to
monitor people who vote more than once. Secretary Cortes remarked the
ability to perform duplicate checks is one of the greatest benefits
of centralized systems such as SURE. Dave Burgess, Chief Intelligence
Officer of the Department of State, noted they have always planned to
perform a full, statewide duplicate check. He added that SURE will allow
for automatic checks of drivers licenses and social security numbers
when an individual registers to vote. Rep. Gabig noted the reason he
asked is that from a policy standpoint, he does not want people voting
in different counties. Burgess added that in addition, absentee votes
will be captured, and in cases where people vote in person and also
submit an absentee vote, the live vote will be allowed and the absentee
vote thrown out. Rep. Gabig asked if this system is on an interstate
level yet. Secretary Cortes replied it is still state based, and there
is no national system yet.
- Chairman Clymer asked what
the Department is hearing from counties regarding HAVA and SURE. Cortes
emphasized there is still work to be done, and Burgess elaborated, providing
testimonials from various counties across the state. He noted Philadelphia
County is very pleased with HAVA, and Luzerne County has commented it
has been able to streamline its offices. He added Cumberland County
has been an immense help to SURE, and that while the Advisory Board
has been helpful certain areas, individual counties have really stepped
up.
Pennsylvania House of Representatives
State Government Committee
Update on Election Related Matters
January 25,2006
Testimony of Secretary Pedro A. Cortes
PA Department of State
Chairman Clymer, Minority Chairwoman
Josephs, Members of the State Government Committee - good afternoon! Thank
you for the opportunity to appear before you today to update you on the
following election-related matters:
1) Voting System Examination
and Certification Status
2) Voter Verified Voting
3) Statewide Uniform Registry of Electors (SURE)
1) Voting Svstem Examination
and Certification Status
As you are aware, the Help
America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) sets forth the mandatory standards for
voting systems used in federal elections as of January 1,2006. The standards
apply to all States, including the Commonwealth. In September, I appeared
before this committee and detailed the Department's plan of action with
respect to voting system examinations. Because of delays with federal
examinations, at that time there was only one (1) HAVA compliant system
certified for use in Pennsylvania. I am pleased to inform you that as
of today, the Department has certified seven (7) additional systems, for
a total of eight (8). Counties must choose among these systems to meet
their federal obligation to have HAVA compliant voting machines in place
by this year's first federal election - May 16, 2006.
To assist the counties with
the procurement of the voting equipment, the Department of General Services
issued a Request for Proposals that allows counties to purchase voting
systems from a statewide contract. This contract is better known as COSTARS
(Cooperative Sourcing To Achieve Reductions in Spend). COSTARS eliminates
the counties need to do
individual requests for proposals and bidding, thus saving the counties
time and money.
More importantly, COSTARS gives
the counties increased leverage in negotiating the price of their voting
systems because of bulk purchasing. The County Commissioners Association
of PA is working closely with the counties in making the most out of available
funds and resources.
2) Voter Verified Voting
The use of voter verified paper
audit trails (VVPAT) and voter verified paper ballots (VVPB) is a topic
of national discussion among government election officials, technology
experts, voting interest groups and the public-at-large. The PA Election
Reform Task Force, created by Governor Rendell in December 2004, heard
extensive testimony on this issue. As you may recall, I chaired the Task
Force and Representative DiGirolamo was a member. Because of the complexity
of the issue and out of respect for the proponents and opponents of voter
verified voting, the Task Force recommended on its May 12, 2005 Final
Report that the General Assembly convene public hearings to further examine
the issue. It was clear to the Task Force that more information was needed
to properly understand the legal, financial, technical and administrative
implications of adopting VVPATs and/or VVPBs.
I want to make clear that the
Department of State is not opposed to the idea of voter verified voting.
However, to the best of my knowledge the VVPATIVVPB systems currently
on the market either violate the Pennsylvania Constitution (Art. VII,
Section 4) and Pennsylvania Election Code (25 P.S. 5 3031.7(1)) as it
pertains to the secrecy of the ballot or
present serious technical/administrative challenges that must be thoroughly
considered. Specifically, most systems record votes on a continuous roll
of paper that could lead to an easy comparison of ballots with the voter
sign-in sheets (numbered list of voters) maintained by election officials
at the polling places. Systems with continuous rolls of paper would allow
poll watchers to track each voter and if the need to review the printed
receipts became necessary, the poll watchers could determine how each
individual voted. This would clearly violate the secrecy provisions of
both the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Election Code. There are also
issues to consider with voter verified systems that print individual pieces
of paper that are
handled by the voters. For example, if a voter removes the piece of paper
from the polling place, the prospect of fraud is raised. If the piece
of paper contains an identifying mark, this violates the Election Code
(25 P.S. 5 3063(a)), as well as raises secrecy problems. In addition,
handling and reading pieces of paper raises additional concerns for visually
impaired voters and those with other physical disabilities. An important
legal consideration is the role of VVPATsIVVPBs during a recount and what
to do if VVPATsNVPBs are lost or destroyed due to mechanical failures.
Finally, the addition of VVPATsIVVPBs to current voting systems will result
in additional costs to the counties. These are just a few of the practical
realities you and your colleagues in the Legislature must consider as
part of the voter verified voting discourse. The Department of State looks
forward to working with the General Assembly to address this important
issue.
3) Statewide Uniform
Registry of Electors (SURE)
When I came before you in September
of last year, I reported that 66 counties were live on the SURE system.
I stated then that by the end of 2005, Philadelphia County would also
join the system. As promised,
Philadelphia went live on December 27, 2005. Accordingly, Pennsylvania
met its federally mandated deadline of January 1, 2006. All 67 counties
are currently using SURE as their official record of voter registry.
In closing, I thank the Committee
members for your work on election reform issues. My staff and I look forward
to continuing to work with you to ensure all Pennsylvania citizens can
participate in an electoral process that is held to the highest standards.
I welcome any questions you may have.
Certification Status of Electronic Voting Systems - 1/25/06
Denied
1.Avante Vote -Trakker - DRE -
2. Diebold Precinct Optical Scan Reader
Approved
1. Accupoll AVS 1000 - DRE
2. Danaher ELECTronic 1242 - DRE
3. Diebold AccuVote TSX - DRE
4. Diebold Central Count Optical Scan Reader
5. ES&S ivotronic - DRE
6. ES&S Model 100 Precinct Counter Optical Scan
7. ES&S Model 650 Central Counter Optical Scan
8. Hart Intercivic eSlate - DRE
Pending
1. Advanced Win Vote - DRE
2. ES&S AutoMark - Optical Scan
3. LIBERTYVOTE Full Face - DRE
4. Populex Digital Paper Ballot
5. Sequoia Edge - DRE
6. UniLect Patriot - DRE
7. Hart Intercivic eScan Optical Scan
|
Action
Tools for PA
Action
alert sign-up
Contact
Your PA Elected Officials
Bill
& Legislation Information
How
to read a bill
Action
Resources
Action
tools for US
Ways
to get Involved
Congressional
Legislative Information
Note: When possible publications are in both PDF (must use Adobe
Reader® to view) and HTML (use web page to view) format. PDF documents,
when printed, are identical in format to what is mailed to you.
|
