Vote-count bill's rebuff doesn't add up
by Fran Wood=20
Wednesday April 23, 2008, 9:47 =
AM
You wouldn't think anyone would be opposed to voting machines that =
can, if=20
necessary, verify their precise ballot totals at the end of Election =
Day.
So you wouldn't think there would be much opposition to a bill under =
which=20
the federal government would reimburse any voting district that chose to =
install=20
such machines.
Neither did Rep. Rush Holt (D- 12th Dist.), who has been pushing =
since 2004=20
for passage of just such legislation and who, last week, thought he =
finally had=20
succeeded.
"It came out of committee two weeks ago unanimously supported by both =
parties," Holt says over the phone. "We had compromised so there would =
be strong=20
support when it came to the floor."
So confident was House leader ship that it waived the usual voting =
procedure=20
of requiring a simple majority and sought a two-thirds "super majority." =
That, explains Holt, would have demonstrated to the Senate and the =
White=20
House that HR5036, otherwise known as the Emergency Assistance for =
Secure=20
Elections Act, had veto-proof support.
But on the day of the vote, something beat it to the House floor: the =
Bush=20
administration's objections.
Bush did not specifically threaten a veto, but he made it clear he =
didn't=20
like the bill, which was enough for most of its Republican supporters to =
bail=20
out.
The bill passed, 239-178. But that was way short of the super =
majority, which=20
tells the White House that the House doesn't have the votes to override =
a veto.=20
This is not the routine way of things. Ordinarily, the administration =
-- any=20
administration -- communicates its views on a bill during the discussion =
period.=20
But on a bill in which it has especially keen interest, pro or con, it =
may weigh=20
in at the time of voting to maximize the impact.
Now, given the House results, the Senate may not even bother to vote =
on the=20
bill, leaving it effectively dead for 2008 and the presidential =
election.
So the question arises: Why is the Bush administration so determined =
to=20
defeat a bill intended to give voters confidence that the votes they =
cast are=20
the votes that get recorded and counted?
Let's look at the bill:
HR5036 designates $630 million for voting districts to replace =
paperless,=20
touch-screen voting machines with electronic machines capable of =
producing paper=20
verifica tion.
Incidentally, Holt's original bill would have required such machines =
in all=20
voting districts. When it became apparent that didn't have the votes, =
Holt made=20
a major compromise, amending it to make the machines optional.
Holt had every indication that would do it. But shortly before the =
vote, it=20
was reported to him that one of the committee's key Republicans was now =
saying=20
the bill was too costly.
"This member had offered amendments to the committee that had been =
accepted,"=20
Holt says. "I called him and said, 'It's no more expensive than you've =
known for=20
six months,' and reminded him the cost estimate was worst-case."
Had every county in the nation opted to buy the most expensive =
equipment,=20
then yes, Holt concedes, it would have cost more than $600 million.
More realistically, he says, the cost would be tens of millions, not =
hundreds=20
of millions.
In any case, the White House's official explanation for its opposi =
tion is=20
that the Holt bill is redundant.
"What they're saying is that there's already money in the Help =
America Vote=20
Act," he explains. And "it's possible a lawyer could argue that some =
unspent=20
HAVA money could be used for this. But that's not what it's for, and =
that would=20
mean they were not comply ing with the rest of HAVA, which also covers=20
registration of immi grants, access for the disabled at polling places =
and other=20
particulars."
His bill, he says, would provide a new option under the Help America =
Vote=20
Act.
He insists he's not giving up on the bill, especially since he's =
convinced=20
that "a sizable majority really does support it."
"I have been trying to get hold of Dianne Feinstein, the relevant =
(Senate)=20
committee chair," he says. "If she isn't going to move it, anything else =
we do=20
in the House will merely be symbolic."
Extreme cynics may say they're not surprised that an administration =
already=20
accused of stealing one election, maybe two, opposes this bill. Holt =
rejects=20
such rhetoric.
"I've been very careful to say one of the reasons we need this =
legislation is=20
that you cannot rule out subterfuge in hacking and fraud in previous =
elections,"=20
he says. "But I've also been very careful not to say that has, in fact,=20
happened. I would like to believe better of my country."
![](3D"http://www.nj.com/images/toprail/njlogo_242x90.gif")
=20
![3D"NJVoices.com:](3D"http://www.nj.com/images/impact/njnews_icon.gif"){kind=icon}
=20
![](3D"http://www.nj.com/elections/promo/elections_icon.jpg"){kind=icon}
![](3D"http://www.nj.com/images/njvoices/adubato.jpg")
![3D"Send](3D"http://blog.nola.com/images/mail.gif")
![3DPrint](3D"http://blog.nj.com/images/printer.gif")
![3DReddit=20](3D"http://www.nj.com/images/article/reddit_icon.gif"){kind=icon}
![3DDigg](3D"http://www.nj.com/images/article/digg_icon.gif"){kind=icon}
![3Ddel.icio.us=20](3D"http://www.nj.com/images/article/del.icio.us_icon.gif"){kind=icon}
![3DGoogle](3D"http://www.nj.com/images/article/google_icon.gif"){kind=icon}
=20
![3DYahoo](3D"http://www.nj.com/images/article/yahoo_icon.gif"){kind=icon}
![3DFacebook=20](3D"http://www.nj.com/images/article/facebook_icon.gif"){kind=icon}
![3D""=20](3D"http://www.nj.com/images/footer/footer_nj_internal.gif")
![3D""=20](3D"http://www.nj.com/images/footer/footer_subscribe.gif")