Act before Friday 7/8 to oppose hb 3044! Oppose telephone voting bill that does not comply with Oregon law

I just found out that a reincarnation of sb 1046 which authorized the SOS to make a contract with no more than 6 county clerks to allow disabled voters to vote by phone in elections "other than primary, general or statewide special election" has risen from the dead in the form of hb3044. There is no effort to comply with existing Oregon law requiring paper ballots for recounts. There is no effort to address the serious security concerns of recording votes via phone which are to be retrieved by county election officials from an internet website. It is also unclear how these votes are to be included in the tally since there is no paper ballot. I am also concerned that a voter's privacy might be compromised since it is not clear how the identity of these voters would be hidden. Just like DRE's it is possible that by sequencing of transactions it would be possible to identify an individual voter and how their ballot was cast. The argument is not that we are against allowing disabled citizens to vote but that we want to make sure that their vote has the same safeguards and privacy that other citizens have. The HAVA committee is already addressing those issues in a way that complies with Oregon law. This bill is not the way to do it.

The original hb3044 passed the House on 4/13 -- it simply said that disabled voters should be allowed to go to the head of the line at the Elections office or other voting place.

Now it has been amended in the Senate Rules committee to include the telephone voting provisions from sb1046. The amended version passed the Senate Rules committee last Friday and will hit the Senate floor on Thursday where it is expected to pass since sb 1046 has already passed the Senate. Then it goes to the House where House Elections and Rules Chair has the option of accepting the amended version and it will be a done deal. Then it goes to the Governor's desk for signature.

At this point in time it seems futile to try to stop it in the Senate where the earlier version sb 1046 passed handily 16-8-2. It might be possible to convince Republican Derrick Kitts Chair of House Elections and Rules not to accepted the amended bill. E-mail for Derrick Kitts is rep.derrickkitts@state.or.us -- phone is 503-986-1430. He represents District 30.

The key arguments to make:

1. This does not comply with exisitng Oregon law requiring paper ballots for recounts.
2. There will additional costs connected to running two separate ballots and incompatible elections systems in some local elections for some citizens. In a time of tight budgets where is the money to come from?
3. By allowing a less secure election process, disabled citizens are not treated equally with other citizens. Separate but unequal is not allowed under the law particularly in something so fundamental to democracy as the right to vote.

Kathy