VOTING MODERNIZATION BOND ACT OF 2002 (Shelley-Hertzberg Act)

Legislative Bond Act

THE QUESTION

Should the state borrow $200 million ($200,000,000) through the sale of general obligation bonds to assist counties in the purchase of updated voting systems?

PROVISIONS (reformatted from Legislative Analyst information)

Specific provisions are as follows:

• allows the state to sell $200 million ($200,000,000) in general obligation bonds for the purchase of updated voting systems
• money raised from bond sales would be used to assist any county in the purchase of new voting equipment that is certified by the Secretary of State
• prescored punch card voting systems would be ineligible for funding
• creates a new five-member Voting Modernization Board to consider applications and award bond monies to counties for the purchase of new voting equipment that meet the required specifications. Two members of the Voting Modernization Board would be appointed by the Secretary of State and three members by the Governor.
• a county must contribute one dollar of county funds for every three dollars of bond monies received

Additional provision provided by the League:

• a voting system that does not require a voter to directly mark on the ballot must produce, at the time the voter votes his or her ballot, or at the time the polls are closed, a paper version or representation of the voted ballot; this version shall  not be provided to the voter, but shall be retained by election officials for use during a manual recount or other recount or contest.

BACKGROUND

Under the present law, counties may purchase and use any of three voting systems that have been certified by the California Secretary of State for use in California elections. These voting systems are punch card, optical scan, and direct record electronic (touch screen) systems.

Punch card systems use prescored computer punch cards upon which the voter indicates his or her vote choices by punching out the prescored holes.  Optical scan machines require a voter to mark his or her selection on the ballot with a pencil or other approved marking device.  Touch screen systems require a voter to select his or her options on a computer screen.

Additional Background provided by the League:

The Secretary of State has announced that the certification of Votomatic and Pollstar punch card voting systems will be revoked with an effective date of no later than July 1, 2006.  

The Secretary of State is responsible for certifying voting systems for use in California. The certification process is an examination of the accuracy, reliability, and user friendliness of the system. Before any system is certified for use, a public hearing must be held to solicit public comments.

In January 2001, the Secretary of State's office sponsored the first Election Technology Expo. More than 300 people attended.  At Expo 2001, all the Registrars of Voters stressed the importance of voter outreach and education about any new voting system. In the California's November 2000 election, 72% of voters used punch cards, 25% used optical scan systems, and 3% used touch screens.  Individuals not voting for president numbered 177,010--85%  of them on punch cards, 14% on optical scans, 1% on touch screen.
     
The Secretary of State's Internet Voting Task Force reported that Internet voting is not recommended at this time because of the inherent security limitations of computer hardware and software.

Provisional ballots are essential.  Their use allows election officials to investigate and correct their errors, as well as voter mistakes, and to avoid confrontations on Election Day.

A press release from the office of the Secretary of State, dated June 6, 2001, expressed approval of proposed "Democracy Fund" legislation (AB 56 - Hertzberg, which became Proposition 41).  It stated that "existing voting systems are extremely accurate when used properly, but as we learned from Florida last fall, voters do not always use the systems properly.  The state must provide local governments with the resources they need to implement modern voting technologies to simplify voting and remove any ambiguity from the vote counting process."

FISCAL EFFECT

State Bond Costs.  For these bonds, the state would make principal and interest payments from the state's General Fund over a period of about ten years.  If the bonds are sold at an interest rate of 5 percent (the current rate for this type of bond), the cost would be about $255 million to pay off both the principal ($200 million), and interest ($55 million).  The average payment would be about $26 million per year.

Cost to Counties.  The measure would result in additional costs to counties that receive bond funds.  First, the counties would incur one-time matching fund costs of about $67 million statewide.  Second, counties would also incur additional ongoing costs to operate, maintain, and store the new voting equipment, and to train staff and voters on how to use the machines.  The magnitude of these additional costs will vary among counties depending on the number of voters and the difference in operating costs between a county's current voting system and the new voting system.  The additional annual operating costs could be in the several tens of millions of dollars on a statewide basis.

IMPACT OF YES OR NO VOTE

A YES vote means that the state could sell $200 million in bonds to assist counties in the purchase of updated voting systems.

A NO vote means that the state could not sell these bonds.

SUPPORTERS SAY

• Two-thirds of California voters are using decades old systems.

• Upgraded voting systems will increase voters confidence in our election system, boost participation and avoid costly lawsuits arising from election irregularities.
• Proposition 41 will help counties modernize elections equipment.  This will improve voting security, create multiple language ballots, and ultimately reduce the cost of running elections.

OPPONENTS SAY

• The Governor and Legislature can and should buy voting machines with money they already have, from tax dollars paid in income taxes, sales tax, and other taxes.
• As California faces fiscal uncertainties caused by terrorists and a struggling economy, taxpayers should not be saddled with more debt.
• If elected officials spent our money wisely, taxes and fees we already pay would be more than enough to update voting systems.

SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION

Official ballot arguments in support are signed by Assembly Majority Leader Kevin Shelley; League of Women Voters of California President Barbara Inatsugu; Secretary of State Bill Jones.

Official ballot arguments in opposition are signed by Honorable Dennis Mountjoy, Member of the Assembly, 59th District;  Jon Coupal, President, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association;  Lewis K. Uhler, President, National Tax Limitation Committee.

For more information:

Supporters:

Yes on Prop 41, (916) 325-8600, www.41-yes.org
League of Women Voters of California, (916) 442-7215, www.ca.lwv.org

Opponents:  

Honorable Dennis Mountjoy, (626) 357-8237, dmountjoy59@aol.com
National Trust Limitation Com.  (916) 786-9400, www.limittaxes.org/
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, (916) 444-9950, www.hjta.org

For more information, see Smart Voter Proposition 41.

Send comments and suggestions concerning the content of this page to lwvcprocon@hotmail.com.
Send comments concerning the format or usability of this page to lwvc@vcwatts.org