Iowa Voters

The Iowa Secretary of State is fixing to scare off a group of criminals who must be insanely smart. These folks commit their crimes in front of numerous witnesses. They always offer a handwriting sample first. They never get caught. They are so sly, people never even know the crime occurred.

They are Iowa’s fraudulent voters.

Deputy of Elections Mary Mosiman was on the radio Monday warning about this crime. She was pinch-hitting for Secretary Schultz, who yanked himself at the very last moment. Was Schultz too embarrassed to finger these elusive voters with Mosiman’s evidence? Listen to her case:

“If they did want to commit fraud, they could go in as somebody else, they could vote. They would be long gone before anybody knew about it, assuming that person that was really the voter did not come in. We still wouldn’t know because when that actual person came in, the person who committed the fraud so to speak would be gone.”

Yes, unlike dumb criminals, these people leave the scene after they commit their crimes. When asked for actual instances of this crime Mosiman repeated herself:

“Personally, I can say, that if it did occur, we would never know because the person who committed that crime is long gone. Have there been any instances that have been caught and prosecuted? None that I am aware of.”

In other words, “It never happens.” If it had, the Deputy of Elections would be able to cite places and dates rather than baseless fears.

Just consider the risks these criminals take:

*They cannot impersonate a deceased voter because those names are regularly removed from the rolls.

*They cannot impersonate an inactive voter, because inactive voters already must show an ID.

*They cannot impersonate someone who has already voted, because that is a dead giveaway!

*They cannot impersonate someone who shows up later because their signature forgery would be strong evidence against them. (Plus the number of times it has happened would become known by the number of alleged forgeries. So far that number is at zero, even according to Mosiman.)

They must impersonate an active voter who does not actually show up later to vote. It must be one who would not be recognized by any poll worker or poll watcher. See how smart these criminals are! How do they do it?

Never mind that question. Secretary Schultz wants an ID law!

The Iowa county auditors saw this coming in November when Schultz rode the wave into office. They formed a study group and prepared to write a report. They even visited other states to hear in person from other election officials who also contend with these smart criminal voters.

Never mind that report. House Republicans wrote a voter ID bill and passed it without waiting for the auditors to report. Damn the facts, full speed ahead.

The bill was so bad the auditors voted to oppose it.

On the radio Mosiman admitted that she had once advised Schultz the ID cards were not needed. Now she covers for him, saying she is “hearing” new talk without saying if was factual, fanciful, or irrational talk.

Even if those these criminals are so smart that they always escape—so smart that we aren’t even sure they exist—in another way they are insane. Consider this:

. . .why would any sane person risk going to prison to influence an election by one vote? It is all the more implausible to imagine an army of impersonators coordinating their efforts on a scale that could affect an election, let alone doing so without being detected. That is why the election fraud that’s actually been tried involves ballot-box stuffing or bulk submitting of absentee ballots—schemes that allow a few people to roll up a lot of fraudulent votes. A photo-ID requirement does nothing to prevent those real shenanigans

So what is really going on here? Do Schultz and his Republican allies really fear these imaginary criminals? Or do they see a way to shrink the electorate? Could they maybe shrink it enough someday to get back to just letting white property owners vote? Maybe so.

cross-posted at Bleeding Heartland.

Iowa’s county election officials (the county auditors) oppose a bill that has already passed the Iowa House. The bill would require voters to show a photo ID before voting. Absentee voters would have to photocopy their ID and mail it in with the ballot (Think for a moment how that would help the auditor know if the person in the photo matches the person who mailed the ballot).

Republicans dominate both the House and the auditors group. The sixty House Republicans voted unanimously for the bill three weeks ago. According to the Register, not a single auditor endorses it. Meeting last week, the Iowa auditors decided to register their group in opposition to the bill.

Secretary Schultz said the bill, HF 95, should be passed to prevent people from impersonating someone else at the poll. Auditors said they had never heard of such a thing happening.

This is the second time the group has rebuked the new Secretary of State. Last summer a large faction of the auditors endorsed Schultz’s opponent, an unusual step for these generally tight-lipped officials. Even Schultz’s home county auditor, Republican Marilyn Jo Drake, endorsed the incumbent Mike Mauro.

Other groups that have registered against the bill include the ACLU, AARP, the Governor’s Developmental Disabilities Council, the Methodist Church, and Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement. Backing the bill are the Farm Bureau, the Iowa Minutemen, and the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition.

also posted at Bleeding Heartland.

Before the November election officials in Columbia County New York agreed: they would hand count every race and thus audit their new paper ballot scanners. Six weeks after the election the results had been verified and the county was crowing:

This year, the first in which every single vote was cast on a paper ballot, Columbia County hand-counted each and every one. Before the election, Commissioner Jason Nastke and I ordered a full hand count so that our county’s voters could have complete confidence in the vote totals that we’d certify after the election. Who could distrust hand counts that are done by teams of Democrats and Republicans, with one looking over the shoulder of the other every step of the way?

Columbia is the only county that did this, though.

First they did it the fast way with the scanners. Then they did it the old-fashioned way with their own eyes. Other New York counties pretended to “audit” their races by looking at one or two machines, a process scorned by statisticians.

Meanwhile Iowa has no audits whatsoever after the election. State Representative Mary Gaskill got an audit bill through the Iowa House in 2008 but the state senate sat on it. Maybe Secretary Schultz can revive it. After all, he hails from the Iowa county with the most egregious election results in recent memory–proof that audits are needed. And his state senator is the key obstacle to Gaskill’s audit bill.

This week a bill to randomly check on the electronic vote tally by actually looking at some ballots (ah–the audacity!) passed the Iowa House without dissent. But it’s already being stymied in the Senate, though no one is sure why. This paradoxically reverses the situation from four years ago when the Senate unanimously passed a paper trail bill only to see the House kill it without explanation.

Meanwhile the great state of Montana on Tuesday signed its audit bill into law. A picture of the Montana Secretary of State appeared in GovTech magazine as a result. Let’s tell Senate Democrats that Mike Mauro is just as good looking as Secretary McCulloch and also deserves to be featured in national publications.

cross-posted at BleedingHeartland.org

The Iowa House has passed a bill to speed up election returns, as if getting speedy results were the main goal of the counting. The House wants to count absentee ballots before the polls open, something that is now strictly forbidden.

Don’t worry about this affecting the election by giving one side a warning that the results may be close. Don’t worry–it will be illegal to leak this information even though some highly political people at the courthouse will know the information on the absentee results. Don’t worry even if the county auditor himself is in a tight re-election race. Having his staff counting the ballots on Monday won’t allow him to be warned about his imminent defeat on Tuesday. Don’t think that the people who went to jail in Ohio for rigging the recount in 2004 have any cousins in Iowa election departments.

If this is HSB 133 we’re talking about (the news reports don’t give the bill number) there’s even less reason to worry. The bill now on the web says only quite a few party cheerleaders will get to bite early on the apple of knowledge:

The only persons who may be admitted to that room are

the members of the board,
one challenger representing each political party,
one observer representing any nonparty political organization or
any candidate nominated by petition pursuant to chapter 45 or
any other nonpartisan candidate in a city or school election appearing on the ballot of the election in progress,
one observer representing persons supporting a public measure appearing on the ballot and
one observer representing persons opposed to such measure,
and the commissioner or the commissioner’s designee.

I’m sure they can keep a secret, so don’t worry, be happy. Get to bed early on election night. It was a long campaign. Just be glad it’s over.

But if it’s really close, we still won’t know about recounts or audit results. We’ll still have to wonder. So what’s the point for democracy? Early bedtimes? Insider trading?

The Iowa Senate’s state government committee has approved the bill that would move the USA away from the archaic electoral college. I was quite surprised–but pleased–to hear from Jack Kibbie last week that this might happen.

Most Americans think the electoral college is a mistake. Apparently the whole world agrees, because no other country has ever copied this 200 year old method of choosing a leader. It’s really a relic of the free-state, slave-state compromises that were made in writing the Constitution. Until now it’s been impossible to get rid of it, because it’s so hard to amend the Constitution.

The new idea is to sign up states in a contract to cast their electoral votes as a group with all the votes going to the winner of the national popular vote (NPV). If Iowa joins the group, we’ll vote for the national winner even if another candidate did better in Iowa. This plan will go into effect when the group controls the majority of the electoral college votes. Ingenious!

Skeptics always assert that the electoral college protects us and other small states. This not true. Research into where candidates spend their time and money in the 90 days before a Presidential election proves they don’t go to small states unless they are also swing states, such as Nevada in 2008. Who campaigned in Rhode Island or Wyoming? No one did, because they are not swing states.

So far only four states have joined—Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois and Hawaii. These are states that usually get ignored by Presidential candidates, so I can see why they passed it. Iowa has been a swing state, the center of much spending and campaigning. If the electoral college is kaput, we may get less attention. That’s why I was surprised to see the bill gaining ground here. Time to get cynical . . . .

Why would we pass this bill? Isn’t this carrying good government a little too far? (snark)

Maybe it has to do with the caucuses. We barely defended our caucus timeline in 2008 from attacks by Florida and Micigan. We get double attention in Iowa as both the first caucus and as a swing state. If we are generous enough to forego the swing state advantage, maybe the voters elsewhere won’t keep beating on our caucus advantage.

Or maybe we see our swing-state status eroding. If Iowa becomes reliably Democratic(voted for the D five times of the last six elections), candidates won’t come here in election years, only in caucus years. Going to the NPV could bring the candidates back since those many Iowa independents and Republicans would not be disenfrancised in a NPV system.

Whatever the motive–good government or selfish government–I’m glad for the progress. I hope the full Senate approves it, too.

——cross-posted to bleedingheartland where you can post comments.

Would Republican Senators kiss off Michigan autoworkers if the electoral college were abolished? This year they hoped McCain could carry Michigan, but when he didn’t, Senators saw no need to treat factories the way they treated banks just three months ago.

Many of Michigan’s own Republican state legistlators have now voted to close the electoral college(scroll down). On the same day the US Senate scorned them, Michigan voted for the National Popular Vote.

When Iowa was a swing state (2000 and 2004), we were unlikely to want the electoral college repealed. If we are now seen as increasingly Democratic, maybe our legislature will also pass the National Popular Vote lest we be left out of the fall campaign. The bill was in our legislature last session but went nowhere.

Representatives King and Latham joined 85% of the Republicans in the US House yesterday to vote down a paper ballot bill that could have re-imbursed Iowa for the expense of replacing our touchscreens.

Democrats tried to pass the bill under a suspension of the rules, a maneuver that requires a 2/3 majority. Such smooth sailing appeared possible because the bill had passed out of the House Administration committee unanimously. This time the same committee Republicans voted against the bill!

There were no mandates in the bill, only incentives for states to use verifiable methods of balloting, re-imbursements for new equipment, and money for auditing election returns.

He signed the bill that chases DRE touchscreens out of our state. He’s a better governor than he was Secretary of State.

Thank you, Governor Culver.

Secretary Mauro was on the radio yesterday, taking an hour long victory lap over this and same day voter registration. He’s a very credible Secretary of State with nearly 25 years of election administration under his belt.

Thank you Secretary Mauro.

The House has followed the Senate, voting for paper ballot systems througout Iowa. The bill protects our next Presidential election from the terrible touchscreens:

Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, for elections held on or after November 4, 2008, a county shall
use an optical scan voting system only. The requirements of
the federal Help America Vote Act relating to disabled voters
shall be met by a county through the use of electronic ballot
marking devices that are compatible with an optical scan
voting system.

It’s nice to see how non-controversial this has become. Although there was a grumpy editorial in the Dubuque newspaper this week, the current news story at the DM Register has not even drawn any anonymous comments as of this posting.

The Governor’s signature is expected in due course.

The Iowa Senate has taken us halfway out of the paperless touchscreen trap on a 47-1 vote for an all paper voting system. Jennifer Jacobs has the story.

One legislator said on the radio today that we are hereby modernizing our voting system. That sounds like a refrain from just 3 years ago when we were suckered into new touchscreens–the “modern” system of its (brief) time.

Jacobs reports that touchscreens “have fallen from favor in the last couple of years as watchdog groups rail about equipment failures and security vulnerabilities.” She ought to say that the really credible watchdogs have been computer scientists. And they were “railing” in plenty of time to have avoided this whole fiasco, had the election officials been listening.

Michael Mauro listened. He never fell into the touchscreen trap. Now he is getting us out. Next step: the Iowa House.

A new bill approved by committee today in the Iowa Senate moves us much closer to paper ballots. Senate Study bill 3262 mandates paper ballots for the fall election and the state picks up the tab!

This goes a step beyond previous plans passed last spring to phase out touchscreens as they wear out. That bill also required paperless touchscreen terminals to have printers added to them. Arguments over the cost and who would pay for the printers, as well as over the poor performance they have showed in other states, prompted Governor Culver to flirt with a vote by mail system instead of buying more equipment to replace our 2005 purchases.

When the all mail ballot idea was panned by the state’s auditors this winter, Culver agreed to fund ballot marking devices for all counties that preferred them to touchscreen printers. Today’s legislation amends last year’s Iowa law by phasing out the touchscreens after September’s school board races.

No doubt the recent revenue estimate for the state has made this move much easier–state tax collections are exceeding expectations

State Representative Mary Gaskill wants to check on those computerized ballot scanners by counting 5% of the ballots by hand. She has filed a bill creating a state election audit board to oversee the process. The board would also have broad authority to review election administration in five randomly chosen counties after each general election.

Gaskill’s bill, HF 2206 is simple. Each county must hand count ballots in enough precincts to reach the 5% goal. If the count shows the machine was off by more than 1/2 % the audit would be expanded. If an actual recount of the entire race is invoked by a candidate, the audit would be unnecessary.

Not every race on the ballot will get reviewed during the audit. The bill says

The postelection audit shall be conducted for elections for the offices of president of the United States or governor, United States senator, United States representative, and at least a total of two additional partisan offices or public measures on the ballot, which shall be chosen by lot at the same time, and in the same manner, the precincts are chosen.

Such an automatic audit could have saved New Hampshire from the recount of its Democratic presidential primary last month. For now the Gaskill bill does not cover primaries, but can go into effect for November 2008 if the legislature approves. Let’s hope they do.

What a sad state of finger-pointing we have come to regarding Iowa’s tarnished election administration. In the Sunday Des Moines Register Governor Culver blames counties for the paperless voting machines he let them buy when he was Secretary of State. Story county auditor Mosiman defends her purchase, saying she acted on information available at the time.

They both need better alibis than that.

There was plenty of information available at the time (here, too, and here). If auditors and then Secretary Culver had paid more attention to computer experts like our own Doug Jones in Iowa City, we could have avoided this mess. Instead Mosiman went to Des Moines to testify against a paper trail bill. Auditors listened to savvy salesmen who managed to make those paperless touchscreens work long enough to close the deal. And besides, it was only tax money, much of it coming from the feds.

Culver’s correct that counties made the actual purchase decisions. He’s right that he (belatedly) urged them to have some sort of paper trail. But he was timid as a pussycat, never speaking against touchscreens. Worse than that, he even asked Professor Jones to resign from the Board of Examiners of Voting Machines during the crucial decision making period. Jones had single-handedly protected Iowa from Diebold during the many years he was on the board.

Culver should not prevent the legislature from mopping up. He should tell our Congressional delegation to back the Holt bill that would bail us out of our troubles (with yet more federal money).

Mosiman and the other county auditors who fell for touchscreens should admit that they were not paying adequate attention to the critics who sought to warn them before they spent the money HAVA provided.

Kiss and make up, you two. The legislature is trying to help.

Update: Loebsack is a co-sponsor of Holt’s bill.

A new federal bill could resolve the tension between two of Iowa’s top Democrats–the Governor and the Secretary of State. Today’s Register reports that Mauro wants to get all our votes on paper ballots, but Culver is content to buy “paper trails” for the tempermental touchscreens that now infect the state’s polling places.

It’s a question of money (big surprise!). The good stuff that Mauro wants costs $10 million. Culver is content to waste $2 million on the widely cussed paper trail printers.

They should put their egos aside for a minute and agree on one thing: to call on our state’s Congressmen to support the brand new HR 5036. That new bill by New Jersey’s Rush Holt pays for replacement equipment when states wise up and dump their DRE touchscreens. It is not a mandatory bill, so there is only one point of contention: Do we have the money in the federal budget to mop up the mess HAVA made of voting machines all over the nation. States that are loving their mess don’t have to do a thing. States that are ready to wash up can have the soap paid for by the Congress that caused this problem in the first place.

None of Iowa’s Congressmen have signed on to this bill yet. I called Latham’s office in Fort Dodge this morning. Can you do your part?

Boswell in Des Moines (toll free) (888) 432-1984
Braley in Davenport: (563) 323-5988 or more choices
Latham in Ames: 515-232-2885 or tom.latham@mail.house.gov
Loebsack: email or in Cedar Rapids 319-363-2288
King on the web or in Sioux City call 712.224.4692