Where is the Official Transcript? I can't find at Cong. Record >

[Stephanie]

I just get a one page digest - is it too soon?

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/crecord/05crpgs.html

[mcscajun]

1. Congressional Record (LINK)

http://tinyurl.com/4jhav

On Edit: original link TOO long, edited using TinyURL to provide concise link.

[Stephanie]

2. that's it - thanks so much! Senate page 1 >

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2005_record&page=S41&position=all

The VICE PRESIDENT. Pursuant to S. Con. Res. 1 and section 17 of title 3, United States Code, when the two Houses withdraw from the joint session to count the electoral vote for separate consideration of an objection, a Senator may speak to the objection for 5 minutes and not more than once. Debate shall not exceed 2 hours, after which the Chair will put the question: Shall the objection be sustained?

The clerk will report the objection made in the joint session.

The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

Ms. Tubbs Jones, a Representative from Ohio, and Mrs. Boxer, a Senator from California, object to the counting of electoral votes of the State of Ohio on the ground that they were not, under all of the known circumstances, regularly given.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Who seeks recognition?

The Senator from California.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, thank you so much.

For most of us in the House and in the Senate, we have spent our lives fighting for what we believe in, always fighting to make our Nation better. We may not agree from time to time, but we are always fighting to make our Nation better. We have fought for social justice. We have fought for economic justice. We have fought for environmental justice. We have fought for criminal justice. Now we must add a new fight: the fight for electoral justice.

Every citizen of this the greatest country in the world who is registered to vote should be guaranteed that their vote matters, that their vote is counted, and that in the voting booth in their community their vote has as much weight as any Senator, any Congressperson, any President, any Cabinet member, or any CEO of any Fortune 500 corporation. I am sure every one of my colleagues agrees with that statement, that in the voting booth everyone is equal. So now it seems to me that under our great Constitution of the United States of America, which we swear allegiance to uphold, which guarantees the right to vote, we must ask certain questions.

First, why did voters in Ohio wait hours in the rain to vote? Why were voters at Kenyan College, for example, made to wait in line until 4 a.m. to vote? It was because there were only 2 machines for 1,300 voters when they needed 13.

Why did voters in poor and predominantly African- American communities have disproportionately long waits?

Why in Franklin County did election officials use only 2,798 machines when they needed 5,000? Why did they hold back 68 machines in warehouses, 68 machines that were in working order? Why were 42 of those machines in predominantly African-American communities?

Why in the Columbus area alone did an estimated 5,000 to 10,000 voters leave polling places out of frustration without having voted? How many more never bothered to vote after they heard this because they had to take care of their families or they had a job or they were sick or their legs ached after waiting for hours?

Why is it when 638 people voted at a precinct in Franklin County, a voting machine awarded 4,258 extra votes to George Bush? Thankfully, they fixed it. Only 638 people had shown up, but George Bush got more than 4,000 votes. How could that happen?

Why did Franklin County officials reduce the number of electronic voting machines to downtown precincts while adding them in the suburbs? This also led to long lines.

In Cleveland, why were there thousands of provisional ballots disqualified when everyone knew that poll workers had given faulty instructions to the voters?

Because of this and voting irregularities in so many other places, I am joining today with Congresswoman STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES, a 10-year judge, an 8-year prosecutor, a 6-year Member of Congress, a woman inducted into the Women's Hall of Fame. Folks, she has great credibility, and she asked just one Senator to take a couple of

GPO's PDF

hours. I hate inconveniencing my friends, but I believe it is worth a couple of hours to shine some light on these issues.

We passed the Help America Vote Act, which was important to help American voters, but then we did nothing.

Senators GRAHAM, CLINTON, and I introduced a bill to ensure that a paper trail go along with electronic voting. We couldn't even get a hearing in the last Congress. In the House, it is the same problem. We need this kind of bill.

Let me simply say to my colleagues: I have great respect for all of you. But I think it is key, whether it is Republicans or Democrats, that we understand that the centerpiece of this country is democracy, and the centerpiece of democracy is ensuring the right to vote.

I ask you, my friends from both sides of the aisle, when we get busy working within the next few weeks, let us not turn away from the things that happened in Ohio. Our people are dying all over the world. A lot of them are from my State. For what reason? To bring democracy to the far corners of the globe. Let us fix it here, and let us do it the first thing out.

Thank you very much, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Pennsylvania.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?

There is a sufficient second.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Ohio.

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I find it almost impossible to believe that I am actually standing on the floor of the Senate today engaged in a debate over whether George Bush won Ohio in the 2004 Presidential election. Clearly he did and did so by 118,000 votes.

Because I am limited under the rules to 5 minutes, I will not have time to address all of the wild, incoherent, and completely unsubstantiated charges that have been made about the 2004 Ohio Presidential election. What might be a better way for me to explain the absurdity of the suggestion that Ohio did not go for President Bush is to quote from numerous editorials that have been written in Ohio newspapers.

The Cleveland Plain Dealer, a newspaper that did not endorse either President Bush or JOHN KERRY, said in an editorial this past Tuesday addressing those in Ohio and those from out of State still contesting Ohio's results:

The election horse is dead. You can stop beating it now. Not one ounce of political flesh remains on that carcass. Ohio has counted and recounted: President George W. Bush received 118,775 more votes than your man Sen. John Kerry.

The senator had the good grace and sense to acknowledge the abundantly obvious, go home, and resume his life. You might consider emulating his excellent example, because what you are doing now--redoubling your effort in the face of a settled outcome--will only drive you further toward the political fringe. And that long grass already is tickling your knees.

The 176 Democrats who sit on Ohio's 88 county election boards pondered their jurisdictions' results, accepted their subordinates' good work, and are turning their energies toward the future. Are they all dupes in some Machiavellian Republican scheme? Or do they simply have a firmer grasp of reality than that displayed by the two of you and a handful of unrelenting zealots still ranting in the January rain, eight weeks after the November voting?''

The headline for the Akron Beacon Journal's editorial from December 24, 2004 was:

We wish John Kerry would have won Ohio. He didn't.

The piece went on to say:

The allegations being thrown around are of the flimsiest nature ..... Not one shred of evidence has been presented to show that Ohio's strictly bipartisan system of running elections was manipulated.

The Columbus Dispatch, in an editorial dated December 12, 2004, said:

On Monday, the 20 Ohio members of the Electoral College will cast their votes to elect the next president of the United States. When those votes are added to those from electors in the other 49 states, George W. Bush's re-election will be official.

But that won't stop the conspiracy theorists who claim that Bush stole his victory. Though they are small in number, these naysayers are loud and repetitious. So the truth bears repeating, too: Bush won because more Ohioans voted for him than for Senator John Kerry.

Kerry understands that George Bush legitimately won the election, which is why he conceded on November 3rd. Those who claim that Ohio's vote was rigged have produced nothing that approaches credible evidence, nor have they explained how a conspiracy could be carried out successfully in a decentralized system involving 88 separate, bipartisan county election boards.

Such a conspiracy would have to involve scores, if not hundreds, of Democratic election-board members actively working against their own party and presidential candidate.

It is terribly unfortunate that this body is meeting under these circumstances. I urge my colleagues to act unanimously in seating Ohio's electors.

I ask unanimous consent to have the full text of the above-mentioned articles printed in the RECORD.

There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
(From the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Jan. 4, 2005)

<articles at link - too long>

--





GPO's PDF





--

[Stephanie]

3. continuing - Senate debate

Obviously, there were problems on Election Day. There always are. Elections are run by imperfect humans. Many individual polling places are in the hands of civic-minded neighbors with a few hours of training. Machines malfunction. Voters mess up ballots.

But Ohio has already done its usual intensive post-election audit and reconciliation, a process designed to spot mistakes. That canvass resulted in Bush's unofficial 136,000-vote margin being reduced to the 119,000-vote edge that Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell certified last week.

Ohio's bipartisan elections system makes the kind of GOP conspiracy that some allege all but impossible to execute. Every county board of elections consists of two Democrats and two Republicans. So when Jackson and other national Democrats question Ohio's outcome, they demean their own allies. William Anthony Jr., the African-American who chairs both the Franklin County Democratic Party and its elections board, has been personally stung by Jackson's slander: ``Why would I sit there and disenfranchise my own community?'' he asks.

The recount will go forward because by law it must; history suggests few votes will change. But it is time to focus on how to make future elections more efficient.

Clearly it would help if groups that register new voters did not deliver thousands of applications at the last minute. Ohio also needs an early voting system to relieve at least some of the pressure on Election Day. And rather than retreating from electronic voting machines, the state needs to find a secure system and back it up with a paper record.

Common-sense solutions can make a difference. Endless sour grapes will not.

--



SOUND AND FURY; ELECTION-CONSPIRACY THEORISTS DO NOTHING TO IMPROVE VOTING

<cutting the article - available at link>
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Nevada.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I advise Members on the minority side if they

GPO's PDF

want to speak on this issue, I have been informed that when the speeches end there will be a rollcall vote. If people are waiting to come here an hour from now, they may not get the chance to speak. Members who want to speak should come here now. I have been informed on the majority side there may not be another speaker or, if so, maybe only one other speaker.

For my side, I repeat, as I understand the rules, they should be here to speak for the 5 minutes when the time comes. That time is now.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Minnesota is recognized.

Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I have the greatest respect and personal regard for my friend from the State of California. It is not often I find myself rising in disagreement, but I emphatically disagree and say respectfully that I believe those involved, citizens from around the country, with all their good intentions, are seriously misguided and are leading us into a very unfortunate precedent that was not in any way contemplated by the Constitution, by the law, or by historical precedent.

Obviously, the law, which was established in 1887, did not envision that our role would be to adjudicate in any State the results of an election for President. If it were the intent, it clearly would not have designed this kind of forum where an objection is raised, we each express our opinion for up to 5 minutes, and then vote on a whole array of facts and allegations and statements and contradictions that we could not possibly in this setting determine fairly and accurately.

If we were to do so, if we were to hypothetically object on an inevitably partisan basis to the actions taken by the electorate of a certain State, certified by the election officers of that State and then brought to us today, if we were to overturn that process and in this instance throw the election into the House of Representatives, the damage it would do to our democracy, to the integrity of our system, would be incalculable. If it were to result hypothetically in an alteration of the publicly expressed electoral will in an election for President, the entire credibility of our system would possibly be destroyed.

I am not the complete authority, but as I have read some of the assertions made about the conduct of the election in Ohio, I find serious imperfections. If we shed that spotlight on most States in this country, including my own State of Minnesota, we would find other imperfections.

Democracy is not a perfect process, but it is a process that we have a responsibility, not in hindsight but with foresight, to try to structure and to continue to perfect so it is as close to perfect as is humanly possible. I share entirely the concerns expressed by my colleague from California and others who said despite our best efforts--and I was part of that collaborative effort in this body and under the Rules Committee in the last couple of years--we made some progress but we still fell short.

I respectfully ask the chairman of the Rules Committee, Senator Lott, who is here today, if he would be willing to convene hearings in the very near future and look not just at Ohio but at the experience from this election and how it can instruct us to improve that process for the future.

The Senator from California is absolutely right; every American should know he or she has a right to vote, that they can vote expeditiously, that their vote will be counted and it will be tabulated accurately, whether under Republican or Democratic election officials, whether it is for President from one party or another.

Whether I agree or disagree with the judgment of

the American people, I respect and agree more than anything else with that process and the integrity of the process that produces whatever result they determine. It is that which we must guard today. I regret we are in a position of possibly compromising it. It would be a fatal mistake to overturn it in the way suggested.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Illinois.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I say at the outset, this historic meeting in the Senate will end at some point in a vote. When the time comes to vote I would vote to certify the vote from the State of Ohio.

I do not have personal knowledge of what occurred in the election in Ohio, but I have spoken to those who were present, who tell me that despite irregularities, which I will note, they do not rise to a level where we would challenge the outcome of the election in Ohio.

In addition, the Democratic Party Kerry-Edwards campaign had more than 2,000 lawyers on the ground in Ohio on election day. That was replicated in many States across the Nation. I think what it says is that the nature of this debate and the challenges which we are raising do not go to the results of the election but rather go to our electoral system.

Some may criticize our colleague from California for bringing us here for this brief debate. I thank her for doing that because it gives Members an opportunity once again on a bipartisan basis to look at a challenge that we face not just in the last election in one State but in many States. Because of different electoral practices in States across America, voters who wish to cast a vote for President or Vice President cannot approach the polls with certainty that their vote will be counted or that they can vote in a fair and convenient manner.

There are litanies of examples that could be cited. I do not challenge the legitimacy of the 2004 election outcome. I do not believe there is evidence of widespread fraud. I believe Senator Kerry was correct in announcing his concession, but let us concede on a bipartisan basis that we can and should do better.

In the case of Reynolds v. Sims, the Supreme Court of the United States made it clear that we have a constitutional right to vote. Thank God. That decision which was handed down in 1964 appears clear and unequivocal. But wait. Four years ago that same Supreme Court, in the case of Bush v. Gore, reached a different conclusion and stated that the individual citizen has no Federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States.

It appears that this statement by the highest court in the land is inconsistent with a decision reached 40 years ago.

So where do we stand today? There is great uncertainty. Congressman Jesse Jackson of my home State of Illinois is proposing a constitutional amendment to make it clear and unequivocal that we have a constitutional right to vote in America. I am loathe to jump on the bandwagon for constitutional amendments. I have seen some things done here that are not very proud moments in the history of the Senate when it comes to offering constitutional amendments, but I will take this one seriously.

When you look at the results of the election in Ohio and in many other States, serious questions are raised. These have been documented by the House Judiciary Committee Democratic staff.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Executive Summary of this report, entitled ``Preserving Democracy: What Went Wrong in Ohio,'' be printed in the RECORD.

There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:

What Went Wrong in Ohio

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

<cutting this - available at link>

[Stephanie]

4. Senate page 3

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, the irregularities were not confined to the State of Ohio. Let me give you an Illinois example. In DuPage County, IL, 26 percent of provisional ballots were counted, but in Chicago, a few miles away, 61 percent were counted. That is more than twice as many. That is largely because Chicago allows provisional ballots to be cast by a voter who turns up in the wrong precinct on election day. DuPage County does not, the county right next to Cook County.

How is it that the fundamental right of an American citizen to have his or her vote counted can vary dramatically--not just from State to State but from county to county? We need to address this on a national basis.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator's time has expired.

Who seeks recognition?

The Senator from Michigan is recognized.

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about the most fundamental right in our democracy, the right to vote. Every election day, millions of people in America from different social, economic, and ethnic backgrounds converge on polling stations to cast their ballots. And as they leave the polling booths, they emerge, one by one, as equals.

They are equals because the power of our Constitution resides with the people who delegate power to the Government. Our Constitution guarantees the right of every American to be heard equally about whom they want to lead their Government. We, as their elected leaders, have a responsibility to ensure that those constitutional freedoms are honored and protected.

We have heard from some voters in Ohio and across the country about the election in November. They feel that their voices were not heard.

Thousands of voters waited in line for up to 10 hours to cast their ballots. Some waited until 4 in the morning, and some waited for hours in the rain. Many voters with job, family, and other responsibilities simply could not wait any longer, and they left without voting. It is unreasonable to expect voters to wait 10 hours to exercise their constitutional right to vote.

Some soldiers and other Americans living overseas believe their ballots

GPO's PDF

were not counted. Without question, every legal ballot should count, whether it is cast overseas

or here in the United States.

Many precincts across the country continue to use outdated punch-card ballots and decades-old voting machines that are more prone to error or simply do not work properly. That is disturbing enough--machines from the 1950s being used in 2004--but even more disturbing is that urban areas are disproportionately affected. More urban areas do not have the modern voting machines and equipment that is available in other areas of the country. This disparity affects voting for a large number of minorities, and that is unacceptable.

Even those precincts with electronic voting machines had problems. Some machines malfunctioned, causing votes to be counted more than once or not at all. Anyone who has used a computer at home or at work knows that even saved data can be lost. Yet most electronic voting machines do not have a paper record to back up the system. It could be as simple as a paper receipt like the one you get when you withdraw money from an ATM machine.

In Nevada, electronic voting machines have a paper trail, and we need it for all electronic voting machines. We must ensure the integrity of our voting process.

Many voters felt intimidated at the polls. When they went to vote, so-called election observers demanded that they provide more than the required form of identification. Others read flyers that directed them to the wrong polling places.

These are real people with real concerns, and we need to listen to them. Our Constitution requires that we listen to them. As elected leaders of these people and all of those in our States who have delegated to us the power to represent them, we have an obligation to listen.

After voters experienced similar problems in the last election, we addressed many of those issues. Congress passed, and I supported, the Help America Vote Act, which required the use of provisional ballots for voters who went to the wrong location so ballots would be sealed and counted later in the proper precinct, and each State received funding to update their voting systems.

But in Ohio, the provisional ballot was rendered virtually worthless in the November 2004 election. Ohio's Secretary of State ruled that provisional ballots were valid only if they were cast in the proper precinct.

So today we talk about the problem, but I think we also need to talk about the solution. Voting is fundamental to our democracy. The process should be fair, honest, and easy.

I do not support holding up the results of our November election to address the concerns many voters have raised about the process because I believe we need to move on with the business of the country. But I do support the GAO investigation into these concerns. When we find out what the GAO has to say, we have an obligation to address the problems they uncover.

I do support true election reform that will create a 21st century voting system that we can all be proud of.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator's time has expired.

The Senator from Massachusetts is recognized.

Mr. KENNEDY. First of all, I commend and thank our friend from California, Senator Boxer, for giving us this opportunity to address the Senate on this issue.

On November 3, John Kerry conceded the 2004 Presidential election to George Bush. While we do not question the outcome, many of us remain deeply concerned that for the second time in a row, in a closely contested election, there were so many complaints about the ability of voters to cast their votes and have them counted fairly.

The right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy. Every Member of Congress has a duty to protect and uphold that right. When that right is threatened, Congress must act to protect it. Clearly, the legislation we enacted to do so after the 2000 election was not adequate for the 2004 election.

Forty years ago this year, after the Selma-Montgomery march, many of us in the Senate and House worked hard to pass the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965, to guarantee that racism and its bitter legacy do not close the polls to any citizen.

After the 2000 election, we passed the Help America Vote Act in an effort to correct the serious problems that undermined the right to vote in that election.

Unfortunately, last November, we learned that we still have work to do. As in 2000, the votes of many who wanted to vote were not, in fact, counted. The reasons are many and varied. Some voters gave up in the face of endless lines and waits of many hours at polling places unable to handle the large turnout of voters. In other cases, voting was frustrated by broken or ancient voting machinery, by confusion over applicable rules for voting precincts, or because States decided that certain votes did not comply with arbitrary and inflexible State or local procedures. We saw all those problems in Ohio. It is far from clear the extent to which these serious problems were the result of intended manipulation or widespread incompetence, but either way, the voting process did not live up to the standards worthy of our democracy.

Today's debate is an opportunity for all of us to admit that the 2004 election was flawed and to pledge action in this new Congress to fix the festering problems once and for all.

Citizens must have faith that they will be able to cast their votes efficiently and with complete confidence that their votes will be fairly and accurately counted. We cannot go through another election wondering whether a patchwork of unequal and outdated procedures--whether by accident or design--have yet again denied so many of our fellow citizens the right to vote.

I commend the many thousands of citizens in Massachusetts and other States who insisted that treating today's electoral vote count in Congress as a meaningless ritual would be an insult to our democracy unless we register our own protest against the obviously flawed voting process that took place in so many of our States. We are hopeful that this major issue that goes to the heart of our democracy is now firmly implanted on the agenda for effective action by this Congress.

Few things are more important to the Nation and to each of us, both Republican and Democrat, than a genuine guarantee that the people's will is heard through the ballot. No democracy worth the name can allow such a flawed election process to take place again.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, today, the Congress gathers to exercise the role laid out by the Framers in the Constitution of the United States. The past two national elections have been surrounded in controversy, not just controversy over issues and ideas--which is important and healthy in a democratic system of government--but also controversy over the mechanics of the election and the counting of the votes.

The 2000 election left citizens across this country with a belief that not every vote was fairly counted. In response, Congress passed a much-needed reform legislation. States worked to modernize their equipment and procedures. We had high hopes that the 2004 election--under much closer scrutiny than the election of 2000--would provide the public with confidence that everyone who registered would be able to vote, and that every vote cast would be counted accurately.

Yet, despite the legislation and the more than $2 billion dedicated to fixing the election problems, the election of 2004 was marred with reports of irregularities and, as a result, there is a significant group of our citizenry that seriously questions the results of the vote, and particularly the vote in Ohio.

There are several groups and organizations that are investigating the reported irregularities in the Ohio election. That is important work and it should and will continue. When the investigations conclude, should there be solid evidence of criminal activity, those responsible should be prosecuted, no matter how high that responsibility may reach. But the Senate should not prejudge the results of those investigations.

I applaud the efforts of the Senator from California, Mrs. Boxer, and the Congressional Black Caucus to defend the integrity of the electoral process. But the question before us today is

GPO's PDF

whether we uphold the objection to the certification of Ohio's electors in the count of the electoral vote. The Senate must vote, based on the information available to us at this moment, and absent the clear conclusions of the ongoing investigations into reported irregularities in Ohio, I shall vote to allow the electoral count to proceed.

In this session of Congress, I hope that we can take the lessons learned from November and continue to improve the integrity of elections and encourage greater faith in the results. The legitimacy of our government rests upon the confidence of the people. We, in Congress, must get serious about crafting legislation aimed at restoring confidence in the most fundamental characteristic of a representative democracy, the Constitutional right and duty to vote.

Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, although there were voting irregularities in Ohio, I will not vote in support of the objection. I do respect the result of the recent Presidential election, but I do not respect the process. Several thousand voters believe they were discouraged or even prevented from voting, and several thousand who did vote believe that their votes were not correctly reported. The inequitable allocation of voting machines, the lack of instruction for the review of provisional ballots, and the questionable activities surrounding the recount of the electronic ballots call into question the final results in Ohio. However, I am unconvinced that it would have made a difference in the final outcome of this Presidential election.

I had hoped that we would not have the electoral college votes called into question again. After the 2000 Presidential election, we worked together to pass election reform legislation, the Help America Vote Act. That legislation set Federal requirements for provisional ballots and for voter information, registration, and identification. Unfortunately, that legislation has not yet been fully implemented and does not go far enough.

I would like to work with my colleagues craft legislation to ensure that all of our citizens are encouraged to vote and participate in our democratic process. Our citizens must believe their vote will count. At a time when we are risking lives of our service men and women to spread democracy throughout the world, we cannot ignore the threats to the democratic process here at home. I do not relish the vote I am forced to cast today, but I as I do, I look forward to being able to cast future votes on Federal election reform to ensure that we are not in this position again.

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, serious allegations have been raised about voting irregularities in Ohio during the 2004 presidential election. I agree with many of my colleagues that these allegations must be investigated to the fullest extent possible because every eligible citizen in this nation must have an equal opportunity to exercise the constitutional right to cast a vote in Federal elections. That said, I do not believe there is anything to be gained by sustaining the objection to the ballot certification with regard to the state of Ohio. Senator JOHN KERRY has already conceded the election and there are no pending investigations that will result in sufficient votes being changed so as to alter the outcome of this election.

However, the last two elections have revealed a glaring need for us to rethink how we conduct elections in our Nation. With more and more voters needing to cast their ballots on Election Day, we need to build on the movement which already exists to make it easier for Americans to cast their ballots by providing alternatives to voting on just one election day. Twenty-six states, including my own state of Wisconsin, now permit any registered voter to vote by absentee ballot. Twenty three states permit in-person early voting at election offices or at other satellite locations. The state of Oregon now conducts statewide elections completely by mail. These innovations are critical if we are to conduct fair elections for it has become unreasonable to expect that a nation of 294 million people can line up at the same time and cast their ballots at the same time. And if we continue to try to do so, we will encounter even more reports of broken machines and long lines in the rain and registration errors that create barriers to voting.

That is why I have been a long-time advocate of moving our federal election day from the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November to the first weekend in November. Holding our federal elections on a weekend will create more opportunities for voters to cast their ballots and will help end the gridlock at the polling places which threaten to undermine our elections. I look forward to introducing legislation to this end in the 109th Congress and I urge my colleagues to join me in this effort.

Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, we meet in historic session today. The twelfth amendment to the Constitution sets forth the requirements for casting electoral votes and counting those votes in Congress. The electors are required to meet, cast and certify their ballots and transmit them to the Vice President in his capacity as President of the Senate.

With the exception of objections to the electoral votes from the State of Florida in the 2000 election, objections to an entire slate of votes from a State have been rare. But we have had one today, which gives us the opportunity to discuss and debate a very important issue for our country and for the citizens of my State--the issue of whether we have ensured that every vote is counted.

I will vote to uphold the outcome of this most recent election.

However, I think we have more work to do in the area of election reform, and I think the discussion we are having today is appropriate and overdue.

In 2001, I supported the passage of the Equal Protection of Voting Rights Act. That law was designed to protect voting rights and ensure the integrity of the electoral system in our nation. I did so because I feel that making certain that each citizen's vote is counted and promoting public trust and confidence in our election process is crucial.

The job is far from over. We may need to have additional hearings and we may need to take additional legislative action. There have been troubling reports from this most recent election.

Representative JOHN CONYERS and the minority staff of the House Judiciary Committee have conducted their own hearings and investigations of instances of voter disenfranchisement, flawed or corrupted voting machinery, and inappropriate procedures for counting and recounting votes in Ohio. They have produced a compelling report itemizing and analyzing the irregularities.

[Stephanie]

5. Senate page 4 >

A 2-hour debate on the matter, when people across the country waited in 4, 6 and 12-hour lines to vote all over this country in November, is the least we can do.

The debate we are having focuses attention on legitimate concerns that have been raised regarding the Ohio vote and count, and on broader concerns about America's inconsistent and sometimes flawed election processes which vary so radically from State to State that genuine equal protection concerns arise.

I will certify the election results, because I don't think we should sacrifice the greater good of the continuity of Government at this time. We need to govern. But, what we should be doing is using this debate to get this Congress, and this country, talking about the steps that must be taken to ensure that American elections provide a true representation of the people's will.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, while I was pleased at the large number of Americans who turned out to vote in last year's Presidential election, I am deeply concerned about the many credible allegations of voting irregularities that surfaced in the weeks following the election.

I cannot, however, support an objection to the certification of Ohio's electoral votes. Although I believe this debate is worthwhile, I am not persuaded that the alleged fraud was sufficient to change the outcome of either the Electoral College or the popular vote. Senator Kerry conceded the election more than 2 months ago, and he does not support a challenge. Moreover, the practical effect of discounting Ohio's electoral votes would simply be to allow the election to be decided by the House of Representatives.

In the months leading up to Election Day, I joined with Senator Kennedy in

GPO's PDF

writing with great frequency to Attorney General Ashcroft about our concerns about voter suppression and possible partisan activity by the Department of Justice. It is with dismay, then, that I have learned about the secret counting of votes in Warren County, OH, allegedly prompted by an FBI terrorism warning that the FBI denied making. I have read also of the nearly 4,000 votes President Bush was mistakenly awarded in a Franklin County precinct with only 800 voters.

Although this mistake was corrected, such a malfunction suggests the possibility that other problems with the vote count may have been missed.

Finally, I would point to the shocking misdistribution of voting machines in Ohio. Voters from minority and urban communities frequently waited in line for four to five hours to cast their votes, while suburban voters faced far more manageable waiting times.

We cannot know the effect this may have had on vote totals, but we can and should work with State and local officials to prevent this from happening in future Presidential and other Federal elections.

I commend Representative Conyers and many of his Democratic colleagues on the House Judiciary Committee for their tireless pursuit of a goal that all of us--Republicans and Democrats alike--should desire: a free and fair election in which every vote counts.

I look forward to the results of the Government Accountability Office's investigation of election irregularities called for by Representative Conyers.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I accept the decision voters made on November 2 to elect George W. Bush as the President of the United States. I do not come to the floor today to challenge the outcome of the election. However, I do have concerns about the process. I believe there are some valid issues raised with the Ohio electoral votes regarding the legitimacy of our Nation's voting procedures, and I take these issues very seriously. In this modern, computerized age and in our magnificent, democratic country, there is absolutely no excuse for database errors, lack of polling-place education and training, equipment malfunctions, or voter disenfranchisement.

I supported the Help America Vote Act, HAVA, and have consistently supported adequately funding this law so that States can achieve its requirements and improve voting procedures to ensure every valid vote is counted. In addition, I helped introduce the Restore Elector Confidence in Our Representative Democracy, RECORD, Act, S. 2313, last year. This act contains a provision to strengthen security measures for electronic voting devices to prevent outside tampering and requires a paper printout of votes cast at electronic voting machines.

The right to vote freely and without intimidation is the foundation of democracy and we must do all we can to ensure every vote is counted and recorded accurately. I believe voters must have faith in the electoral process for our democracy to succeed, and I look forward to working with my colleagues in the coming year to ensure that our Nation's election system is fair and effective.

Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, we are here today in this extraordinary session to discuss a challenge to Ohio's electors.

It was gratifying to see the high level of interest in the election create such a large voter turnout. However, it was discouraging to hear of the problems that affected the election in many parts of the country, including Ohio.

Representative Conyers, other House Democrats, and individuals across this country deserve our thanks for the important work they have done to document the issues that arose from the 2004 election.

I would also like to thank Senator Boxer and Representative Tubbs Jones for their diligence in bringing this issue to the forefront.

All voters deserve to get answers, and corrective actions, to the reported irregularities and flaws of the 2004 election.

As my colleagues may know, the Government Accountability Office, GAO, is currently conducting a comprehensive investigation of many of the issues raised in the 2004 election.

I am very supportive of this investigation, and believe that through a complete and full investigation by the GAO, answers to the questions raised regarding the 2004 election will be obtained.

The information the GAO obtains will allow the Congress to take appropriate action to address the problems uncovered.

At a minimum, there are two changes to our election system that should be implemented by the Congress: requiring a paper trail for electronic voting machines and creating a national standard for provisional ballots.

I will work with my colleagues in the Congress to enact these important reforms. We must work to maintain, and indeed improve, the confidence in and integrity of the election process.

I am under no illusion that the actions taken on this challenge will change the outcome of the election. Senator Kerry has conceded the election. The events of today will not change this result, and I fear they will only further polarize our political landscape.

The solutions to the irregularities of the election will not be found or enacted in this 2-hour process today. They will come from a complete investigation, like the on-going GAO one.

Because I believe that contesting the slate of Ohio electors is not the way to achieve the needed reforms of the election system, I will vote against this challenge today.

However, I want to put my colleagues on notice that I will be vigorously pursuing reforms of the election system to enact much needed improvements in the system.

We have to make sure our elections are a solid reflection of the voters' intent. Given the resources of our great Nation, there is no reason why we should not be able to achieve this goal.

Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I appreciate this opportunity to comment briefly on voting irregularities that occurred during our most recent presidential election. While some steps were taken after the 2000 election to help rectify a number of problems with our voting process that were identified across the country, the election in November demonstrates that more needs to be done.

The outcome of the November election will not change because of the current process underway in both the Senate and the House, but I certainly understand the goal of those who have initiated this debate with their written objections to certifying the election results. While I understand that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. KERRY) has indicated that his campaign's legal team was unable to find evidence that would change the outcome of the election, enough questions have been raised to justify a thorough examination by Congress and the administration. Of course, the rules governing this debate are highly restrictive, and do not afford any meaningful review of potential voting irregularities, let alone the consideration of possible solutions to any problems. That effort will have to be done outside the confines of the specific work we have today, and to that end, I strongly hope the Senate Rules Committee will make this the very highest priority, and that the Senate's leadership will schedule any legislation that comes from such a review for prompt floor action.

Since the election, I have heard both Democrats and Republicans pledge to work together to tackle some of our most pressing issues. We are 3 days into the 109th Congress and it is time to put that promise to the test. I look forward to working with all of my colleagues to help ensure that in future elections every eligible citizen who wishes to vote is able to do so and all votes are counted.

(At the request of Mr. REID, the following statement was ordered to be printed in the RECORD.)

*

Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, as we prepare to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, we are called on to look back and reflect on whether we have fixed the systemic problems that this historic legislation sought to address. Have we ensured that all citizens are provided equal access to the ballot, regardless of race, ethnicity, or language-minority status? Have we created the proper safeguards and procedures that make certain that every vote is counted? Have we done enough to protect our democracy's most sacred right--the right to vote?

GPO's PDF

The accounts from our most recent Presidential election suggest that we have not yet met our goal of securing a free and fair election for all Americans. Driving this point home is yesterday's 102-page report published by the House Judiciary Committee's Democratic staff. The report goes into great detail describing the voting irregularities that arose in Ohio last November. The allegations include accounts of voter registration barriers, voter intimidation, voting machine shortages and failures, and confusion over the counting of provisional ballots. These accounts raise serious doubts about whether Ohio electors selected on December 13, 2004, were chosen in a manner that conforms to Ohio law or Federal requirements and constitutional standards.

The most troubling revelation from the committee staff's report is the seeming disproportionate impact these voting irregularities had on minority voters. And so I ask, 40 years later, have we done enough to make sure the letter and spirit of the Voting Rights Act is being enforced?

I ask my colleagues to join me in pushing for congressional hearings on the alleged voting irregularities witnessed in Ohio and elsewhere this past election season. I also ask them to join me in examining whether we need to reform our election laws to ensure that we have free and fair elections for all Americans, regardless of race or ethnicity. Only then can we be sure that we have adequately protected the constitutional right of all qualified citizens to participate in our democracy's most cherished right.

I am traveling overseas on a humanitarian mission to Southeast Asia to visit the areas most affected by the recent tsunami and regret that I will not be available to participate in this afternoon's debate. I nonetheless commend my colleagues who are raising these important issues, and applaud their efforts to give a voice to those who were disenfranchised last November.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, today I rise to discuss an issue that Congress tried to address after the 2000 election nightmare. Frankly, I am stunned to be standing before you 4 years later to take up the same issues of voting irregularities and uncounted votes. And I thank my colleague from California for bringing this important issue before the Senate for debate. Her opposition serves as a call upon the Congress to take action this year to address the ongoing problems in our electoral system.

Today, I will vote to certify the result, but once again we see that the election system in the United States does not work to provide absolute confidence in the results. Today, I am voting to certify the results because I do not believe that the voting problems changed the outcome of the election. Certification should not be delayed further under such circumstances. I believe the majority of voters in Ohio have spoken and that result should be certified.

But while I do not question the result, I rise today to call attention to what went wrong, to the disenfranchised voters, the broken machines and problems people had casting their ballots on election day.

This should not be happening in the United States of America. When we vote for President, we should all have total confidence that every vote counts and that every vote is counted.

There simply should be no questions or problems when we vote for the President of the United States. But, here we are, again, talking about voting problems and talking about lost or uncounted votes.

Like many Americans, I was shocked in 2000 to see how outdated the voting systems in America were. I was also shocked to see how easy it was to manipulate those voting systems and how easy it was for votes to be lost or go uncounted.

It was literally unbelievable. I asked myself, how could such things happen here in the United States? In 2000, we all learned that many ballots, many people's votes, were thrown out, lost, misplaced, or miscounted.

We saw election officials who did not know the rules and some who appeared to ignore the rules.

We witnessed innocent mistakes, machine mistakes, ballot mistakes and mistakes that were not so innocent.

The result was that many votes simply did not count.

The Presidential election of 2000 was an eyeopener. Our election systems in this country, the World's oldest democracy, were broken and needed to be fixed.

Republicans and Democrats agreed this had to be done. It was important. It was vital.

And we did something. We passed the Help America Vote Act. We set standards. We authorized money for the states to help them get new machines, new technology and fix their electoral systems. We provided for provisional ballot systems so that if there was a question about a voters registration they could still cast a ballot.

We thought that our voting systems were well on their way to being fixed. We thought that we would never have another election like 2000. We thought that all votes were going to count and all votes were going to be counted.

We were wrong.

We now see, in 2004, 4 years after the 2000 election debacle, we have people standing in lines for hours because polling places could not handle the turnout, people being given the wrong information, machines breaking down, too few machines in some precincts, ballots being lost or misplaced, and voters being told to go to the wrong place to vote. That is simply not right.

It is not clear if these problems by accident or intended, but the result was that again people were not able to cast their votes or their votes simply were not counted. That's just wrong. That is not suppose to happen in the United States.

And where did much of this happen? In minority neighborhoods, in cities, in economically distressed areas, in primarily Democratic areas across the Nation. I ask myself, is this just a coincidence? Those communities do not think so. And it is critical that we let them know that we take their concerns seriously.

What happened in the last election is less important than making sure that it never happens again. These communities need to know that the Congress is taking action to meet their concerns and will work to correct the abuses that were documented in many States in 2004.

This is not a Republican or a Democratic issue. Ensuring that every registered voter who wants to vote can vote is not a partisan issue. It is an issue of what it means to be an American. In 2004, everyone should agree that every vote should count and we have to do whatever is necessary to make sure that happens.

I call on the Congress to renew its efforts to ensure that there is true electoral reform that every American who casts their ballot can be sure it is counted and that every American who wants to cast their ballot has that opportunity. This Congress should take three steps:

We should fully fund the Help American Vote Act so that all States have the resources that they need to truly reform their electoral systems.

We need to pass legislation to ensure that there is a voter verified paper trail on electronic machines so voters can verify that they cast their ballot and who they cast it for.

We need to re-examine the issue of electoral reform to see what steps the Congress needs to take to ensure that the voting rights of all Americans are protected. So that we have uniform standards. So that provisional ballots work, people do not have to wait in long lines, machines are operative and voters can get to the polls on election day.

And, we must do it now, before this issue fades from view again. The media will move on to other issues. We will move on to other issues. There are many important issues that this Congress will address this year, but as we look forward, and this year celebrate the 40th Anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, we must make this a priority issue. We must act to protect those vital rights and protect our democracy. There is no better way to honor this historic Act than to ensure that we fix the problems in our electoral system that continue disenfranchise voters.

I thank my colleague, Senator Boxer, from California for giving us the opportunity to debate these important points and focusing the spotlight on the voting problems still facing our democracy. And while I vote today to

GPO's PDF

certify the election, I do not certify how our electoral system works in the United States and on that front we must now act.

I look forward to working on this with other members of the Senate. But, we must not be here in 2006 or 2008 talking about how shocked we are to see yet again votes not counted, ballots missing, lost and misplaced, and confused election officials. We must act this year, while the spotlight is still on, to do more to ensure that all voters will have confidence in our electoral system.

[Artemis Bunyon]

6. Check this out

http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=1341743110+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve