The Missouri statutes, code of state regulations, and state constitutional provisions in regards to elections
need to be
consistent with each other, with federal laws and the Federal Election Commission's regulations.
They each also need to be as practical as possible and revised as needed to meet with the
changing times.
I, in general, do not like to see constitutional changes except through actual constitutional
conventions, however, even some of the constitutional provisions may need revised.
I believe revisions to the Code of State Regulations and some of the actual elections laws are
needed. Some of the elections laws are not consistent with each other and some have not been
revised to keep up with what is actually happening in elections. The Code of State Regulations
(CSRS) for elections also are in need of revisions.
Perhaps the secretary of state's office needs to have a special task force review all the election laws,
CSRS and constitutional provisions in regards to the election process and make recommendations
for complete revision. Such a task force should include one or more voters from each of the Congressional
districts, members of the Mo. House and Senate, one or more election authorities, some former candidates,
one or more election materials vendors, and representatives of the secretary of state's office and, of course,
be composed of all political parties. Obviously it is doubtful such an effort could be completed prior to the
2000 Presidential Primary, but perhaps could be before the 2000 General Election.
My suggestions for revisions include as follows:
CODE OF STATE REGULATIONS
15 CSR30-10.020 Needs updated
to reflect the FEC Voting Systems Standards. A timeline needs established both by CSR and statute to phase out all
equipment and software which is not qualified by the FEC-NASED ITA program. The FEC national standards call for
each state to perform certification tests, with the recommendation for both functional and qualitative assessment
and standards defined by state law. Missouri needs to revisit what is needed as certification tests to meet with
changing technology to insure preservation of the integrity of elections. The national standards also include a detailed
escrow system. Missouri needs to develop an independent escrow system and require all the source codes to be
on file and fully secured apart from all partisan politics and conflicts of interest.
15CSR 30-10.020(2)(A) and (C)
Certification Statement of New or Modified Electronic Voting Systems (title should be revised to Certification Statement of
Electronic Voting Systems) are misleading
and invites some election authorities to perhaps think they have a certified system, although they do not. Some
also purchase used equipment. 2000 is a long way
from 1987 or anything which was approved prior to 1/1/87. Although some machines used for electronic vote tabulation
are older most have in the least added software and virtually all appear to have to add something in programming each
election cycle. Each election authority needs to have everything properly certified and all the various versions of
software, other programs, equipment bits-n-pieces need to be fully certified as meeting standards insuring each ballot
is properly counted and no one can pre set the outcome or change the outcome from what the will of the each voter was.
15 CSR 30-10.025 Election Authority's Certification Statement- requires the election authorities to certify everything used in electronic vote tabulation
is approved for use in Missouri. However, there is no penalty for using unapproved equipment or software or
for not bothering to even file the certification statement. There is no point in having such a CSR at all without
a statute setting a penalty. A proper penalty for payment for using unapproved software or equipment would be
for the election authority to be fined triple the amount of payment and an automatic forfeiture of office. The CSR also should
include a timeframe for submission of the certification statement, ie. 60 days prior to each election. There should also
be a criminal penalty for vendors selling unapproved equipment or software in the state.
15 CSR 30- 10.030 Voter
Education and Voting Device Preparation-This needs revised to require a public information forum prior
to each primary and general election and include electronic vote tabulation ballot cards and counting equipment.
1
5 CSR 30-10.040 Electronic Ballot Tabulation--Counting Preparation.
This needs to better meet the FEC Voting Systems Standards. (6) should be revised to include all political parties on the
ballot for the election. Section (7, H) needs explained to the election authorities and vendors.
15 CSR 30-10.050
Election Procedures. Training should be required for each election no matter how many times
the judges have participated. 100 per cent accuracy must be emphasized.
15 CSR 30-10.060
Electronic Ballot Tabulation--Election Procedures. Again ALL parties on the ballot should be part of the teams.
Part (2) should have added that counting should be in public view at all times. A section also needs added requiring all
those permitted to touch any election materials to be a resident of that election jurisdiction.
15 CSR 30- 10.080
Absentee Balloting
Please also see the section on absentee and write-in voting link below and suggestions for revisions
to Missouri statutes regarding absentee voting. This particular CSR as currently
written does not appear to be consistant with the Missouri statutes regarding absentee voting.
Even what is on the instructions as exhibit 3A are not what is being done. For instance, I have never seen a gray ballot
secrecy envelope. There is not always a small black dot on the punch card ballot either. AND Missouri notaries no longer
have to use 'embossing' as a seal. There aren't any instructions on Exhibit 3A for straight party voting, etc.
as shown for the mark sense ballot on Exhibit 3B. Actually exhibits 3A and 3B appear to perhaps go together
versus being for separate and distinct types of voting absentee.
15 CSR 30-10.090 Procedure for Recount of Contested Election makes contested elections
a joke. Obviously if there were vote fraud inside the software for vote tabulation or if the software or equipment simply
malfunctioned it is not apt to be caught through simply recounting with the same system. Contested elections should be
recounted via a different system or hand counted or in the least several of the precincts (up to at least a
mandatory percentage of the total ballots cast) should be manually counted.
15 CSR 30- 10.110 Manual Recount---This section is also essentially a spoof in that neither the election authorities
nor the teams appear to take this seriously, the records for such are seriously flawed, observations of total differences
in the electronic tabulation and the manual recount turn to watching whispering sessions behind closed doors THEN
miraculously matched counts, and the some of election authorities do not understand nor accept which offices they
are required to have manual recounts for. Section 4, of course, permits a waiver of the manual recount, which makes
this section even more of a joke. The random selection of a precinct often also is not random at all, but is the
same one from election to election, often the one with the least ballots case, or the election authority or the software vendor
tells the team which precinct it will be. A manual recount should be required, without waivers, and a certain
percentage of the total ballots cast included in the manual recount.
15 CSR 30- 10-0120 Ballot Management Systems. Most of the election
authorities I have spoken with do not appear to have ever read this CSR nor the FEC Election Document Retention
in an Age of High Technology booklet. Some of the election authorities I have spoken with since 1994 have wished
they had better training for this. An inventory system of election materials needs to be required and each ballot especially
accounted for. Section (D) which requires an affidavit from the election authority of the inventory to be filed with the
secretary of state EACH YEAR would even help insure OLD outdated election materials could not be used. The
inventory perhaps needs expanded to include absentee ballot envelopes and all electronic voting system software and
equipment. However, again there needs to be legislation setting a penalty for non compliance with this.
15 CSR 30-4.010 Postcard Voter Application and Forms. Greene County
Clerk, Richard Struckhoff, and perhaps some other election authorities
have printed their own applications for voter registration and made some
modifications to the required information. Section (4)(C) of this CSR and
115.159 RsMo. need revised to require a time frame for processing this type
of voter registration and that notice be sent to the voter along with
a simple explanation of the next steps for fully qualifying to vote. Election
authorities must not be permitted to play games with who is permitted to be
registered. Lawrence County turned some people away from the polls
then AFTER the election told them they had made a mistake and should have
permitted them to vote. Greene County in 1998 appeared to hold back some motor voter applications for processing
after the election.
Time has not permitted links to each separate CSR nor Missouri statute. You will find all of that information through
the State of Missouri government website linked below. The secretary of state's site has the CSRs and
the statutes may be accessed both directly or through the legislature's site.
Continued in Part Four, Section B linked as lccb.html below.
Links to other sites on the Web
Absentee and Write-in Voting
Counting Ballots
State of Missouri Government
Increasing Voter Participation
NASED Approved Voting Systems
Part Four, Section B--Missouri Election Laws
© 1999-2002 Pankey Network, decisivevoters@yahoo.com e fax 810-314-0929