WASHINGTON, DC—As Congress debates the Help America Vote Act of 2001,” U.S. PIRG
and coalition allies are voicing opposition to a closed rule which does not
allow critical amendments to be debated.
“Election
reform is about granting Americans the right to vote; and with this rule, leadership
has deprived members of their right to vote on a strong amendment package that
would have significantly improved the Ney-Hoyer bill,” stated Adam Lioz,
U.S. PIRG Democracy Advocate.
“Ney-Hoyer
is riddled with loopholes and a major rollback of voter protections. The bill
is an unacceptable substitute for the comprehensive Equal Protection of Voting
Rights Act of 2001,” commented Adam Lioz, Democracy Advocate for U.S. PIRG.
U.S. PIRG pointed
to several problems with H.R.3295:
- H.R. 3295 Rolls Back
Motor-Voter by Allowing States to Purge Occasional Voters
The National
Voter Registration Act (often called “Motor-Voter”) ensures that registered
voters are not removed from the rolls simply because they have not voted recently.
States must have a reason to believe that a voter is no longer eligible before
initiating the “purging” process—and even in this case, there
is a fail-safe mechanism to correct errors at the polls. This bill turns this
protection on its head, permitting states to purge anyone who misses two successive
federal elections and does not respond to a notice.
This provision
would result in the purging of many eligible and properly registered voters.
In the state of Delaware, over one third of registered voters (172,000 people)
did not vote in either the 2000 or 1998 elections. According to the FEC, over
50 million registered voters in the U.S. did not vote in the 2000 elections.
Since turnout is much lower in non-presidential years, it is likely that few
of these people voted in 1998. Even if half either voted in 1998 or received
and responded to a written notice, 25 million eligible and registered Americans
would be forced off the rolls—nearly 10% of the U.S. population.
- H.R. 3295 Fails to Ensure
that Americans Receive a Provisional Ballot—and are Notified as to Whether
That Ballot is Counted
Providing would-be
voters with a “provisional ballot”—to be held aside and counted
upon confirmation of eligibility—if their eligibility is questioned on
election day is the only way to ensure that qualified voters are not turned
away from the polls improperly. H.R. 3295 allows states to opt out of providing
a provisional ballot in favor of an undefined “alternative” and does
not require states to notify the prospective voter as to whether his/her provisional
ballot was counted.
- H.R. 3295 Provides Virtually
No Minimum Standards for Machines—and Therefore Fails to Address the
Most Glaring Problem with our System
The most obvious
lesson from Election Day 2000 was that our voting machines performed inadequately.
Unfortunately, H.R. 3295 does not comprehensively address this problem. The
Ney-Hoyer bill does not require that voting machines meet minimum standards
for error rates; does not require that voting machines—even those purchased
with federal money—notify voters of errors and provide the opportunity
to correct these errors; and does not require existing voting machines to be
made accessible to persons with disabilities. H.R.3295 charges a new federal
agency with the duty to create voluntary election standards, but does not make
adoption of those standards a condition for receiving funding.
- H.R.3295 Fails to Ensure
Voting Access to All Americans
Citizens with disabilities, language minorities, and elderly Americans are
consistently and needlessly denied their rights to access polling places and
cast an anonymous ballot. Ney-Hoyer does nothing to ensure increased access.
- H.R.3295 Does Not Ensure
That Voters Are Educated About Their Rights and Choices on Election Day
Many Americans
were turned away from the polls improperly in 2000 because they did not know
their rights. Others were confused by their ballots and cast a vote that was
not counted. Ney-Hoyer does not provide a minimum standard for voter education.
- H.R.3295’s Enforcement
and Administration Provisions are Weak
Ney-Hoyer creates a new federal agency—the Election Assistance Commission—to
monitor states’ compliance with minimum standards and to administer a
multi-billion dollar grant program, among other duties. This Commission is
composed of part-time members and lacks subpoena power over the states. It
cannot even place reasonable conditions on the use of the funding it is charged
with handing out.
“Because
reformers were not given the opportunity to improve this flawed legislation,
we have not choice but to urge members to oppose the Ney-Hoyer bill,” Lioz
concluded.
