  |
|
| State and Local Election Integrity Organizations | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
 |
|
| North Carolina: NCACC Kinder Gentler GUTTING of Public Confidence in Elections Law |
|
|
|
| By Joyce McCloy, North Carolina Coalition for Verified Voting | |
| January 04, 2006 | |
The North Carolina Association of County Commisioners
has a kinder friendlier version of their efforts to GUT the Public
Confidence in Elections Act: Perhaps responding to public
criticism of their Dec. 22nd letter to Gov. Easley, they have put a new
spin on the "sell" in their latest press release, dated January
3rd, 2005:
Voting Equipment UpdateTranslation: We don't oppose the law. We just want things that are prohibited by that law and federal law, and are not actually necessary to meet any of these laws. "The Association is not asking to delay the May 2 primary,"No, they are just requesting a delay in the implementation of S223, which will result in a delay in the primaries "nor are we advocating eliminating the paper trail requirement. At its June 2005 meeting, the NCACC Board of Directors discussed S223 – before it was unanimously passed by the General Assembly – and voted only to oppose any unfunded mandate from the state relating to elections equipment changes."Eliminating the paper trail requirement may be an incidental result of hauling S 223 back before the lawmakers, when lobbyists get a second turn at it. "The Association continues to advocate for more time, more money and more choices for counties to implement the requirements of S223, The Public Confidence in Elections"We don't oppose the law. We just want the provisions governing purchases to be set aside while we purchase equipment. When we've bought our equipment, then you can reinstate the purchasing provisions. On the NCACC website they go on to say: "The North Carolina General Assembly did not provide enough funds or enough time for counties to purchase new elections equipment to meet new state and federal elections standards,"The would like $20 Million more from taxpayers. Each county is eligible for up to $12,000 per precinct plus $1.00 per registered voter up to $100K limit. This is more than enough money to pay for new optical scan/ballot marking systems for each county. Counties that want the more expensive and optional touchscreen or direct record machines will have to pay the difference (2 to 3 times more) from their own budget. [Text of the bill] “The state did not provide any additional money to counties to meet the state requirements,”NCACC lobbyist asked for more money at the legislative hearings and this was voted down unanimously. Touchscreen machines are not mandated by the state law, and cost 3 times as much as optical scan equipment. Rep Joe Kiser specifically amended S 223 so that the Federal HAVA funds would be equitably divided to all counties to completely cover the cost of the more reliable optical scan equipment (that computer scientists recommended). “It is unreasonable to expect that all 100 counties can review the approved equipment and then decide which to order by Jan. 20,”According an article in the Sun Journal, 64 counties already have selected equipment manufactured by the privately held company headquartered in Omaha, Neb. They include Carteret, Onslow, Duplin, Gaston, Forsyth and Durham counties. An ES&S representative was quoted, "We rolled out systems for South Carolina in a similar amount of time," New Bern Sun Journal "Well, it certainly makes my board's decision on Tuesday much easier when now they have to decide between one," said county Elections Director Mike Ashe [Durham Herald Sun] "HAVA implementation in North Carolina was significantly delayed while the General Assembly deliberated S223, creating a very tight time constraint for counties to obtain new equipment, so much so that many counties may be forced to use paper ballots for the May 2 primary elections."S 223 was filed on February 24, 2005 after 3 months of study committee which included a County Commissioner as panelist. NCACC lobbyist Paul Meyer was present at several of the legislative hearings. The bill went through 30 revisions in order to "please everybody".. Maybe more election officials need to develop the CAN DO attitude that this election director has. Meanwhile, Ashe said he's confident that Durham can be ready for the May primary. "Am I worried? No," he said. "However, it is going to be a challenging few months. There's a lot that has to be done in a very short period of time."Say NO to more money. It is not needed. Touchscreens are OPTIONAL, not required, and not recommended. The County Commissioners should have been on the ball - they knew on August 26 and earlier that they needed to contact voting machine companies regarding upgrading or retrofitting equipment. If their vendors didn't want to bid new systems in the state, but had existing systems there (such as Hart or Microvote), they could potentially have demonstrated the ability to comply with those requirements (1-8 of Section 1-a of Session Law 323, the stuff that would go into the RFP). If the counties failed to do that, or their existing vendors failed to do that, then they shouldn't have a problem with a new system being "imposed" on them ... They're off the hook. They can blame any problems on the state or on the vendor(s). “We would also like for counties to be able to use their existing HAVA-compliant equipment for the May 2 primary."What HAVA compliant equipment? I would like that too, but check the list of voting machines in North Carolina (model number not included) against this federal certification list, few if any of voting machines in NC meeting the HAVA requirements. HAVA requires that voting systems be qualified to the 2002 Federal Standards. Advisory Almost all voting systems, listed here, including Microvote and Sequoia were only certified to the 16 year old federal qualification standards of 1990. This information comes from the Federal Certification list at the website of the National Association of Election Directors here. The same goes for the Hart Intercivic machines Catawba purchased in 2004. "If counties end up using paper ballots for the May primary, it will take longer to tabulate and report the elections results, and that would not instill much confidence in the general public about the elections process in North Carolina.”We're on a tight schedule, but it's a doable schedule," said Keith Long, an independent contractor who the State Board of Elections has selected as its voting system project manager. Will election boards be able to meet the tight deadlines before the May 2006 primary? Election Director Pinion is optimistic. "We're used to tight deadlines with an election," she said. "So I'm sure we'll handle this." [The Kinston Free Press] November 2005, Carteret used hand counted paper ballots. “During Mr. Henderson’s first meeting, the board decided to use paper ballots for the November 2005 municipal elections and bond referendums.” [Carteret News Times] Our question - What would have happened if the NCACC crew had been running NASA during the 1960s? JFK: I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the Earth. Comment on This Article
You must login to leave comments...
Other Visitors Comments
There are no comments currently....
|
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
| |
|