|
Many of the issues that have arisen from
Oregon’s vote-by-mail system were discussed in one of my previous
newsletters. Three bills are currently
being proposed for the 2015 legislative session that would further add to the
murkiness of that system. I believe they could potentially undermine the
integrity of future elections.
House
Bill 2177 is similar to HB
3521, which was introduced in the 2013
regular session. Referred to by many as the “voter motor” bill, it was strongly
opposed by grassroots activists throughout the state.
HB 3521 passed the House on a largely
party-line vote. Fortunately, it died in a Senate floor vote on the last day of
the 2013 session. I was among the 14 Republicans and one principled Democrat
who voted to defeat the bill.
The results of November’s elections will make
it much more difficult to prevent this particular bad idea from becoming law
during the 2015 session. Democrats now have an 18-12 supermajority in the
Senate and are one seat shy of a supermajority in the House.
HB 2177 was filed prior to the start of the
session at the request of Secretary of State Kate Brown. The duties of her
office include overseeing and certifying all of the elections that take place
in Oregon.
The bill directs the Secretary of State, by
rule, to “establish a schedule by which the Department of Transportation shall
provide the secretary electronic records
containing the legal name, age, residence and citizen information for, and the electronic
signature of each person who meets the qualifications identified by the
secretary” in their databases who “may” qualify as an elector.
The database will include drivers’ licensees
as young as 16 years of age who will not be eligible to vote for another two
years. The bill prohibits the information collected for those under 18 years of
age from being disclosed as public record.
It does not appear to determine who will be the custodian of those
records or who may have access to the records.
The bill directs the Secretary of State to
register each qualified non-registered person in that database to vote. It also
requires the Secretary to notify them how to adopt a political party
affiliation. Finally, it requires the Secretary to instruct the person how to
decline voter registration.
This process would be accomplished by the Secretary
of State’s office by providing those newly obtained electronic records to all
of Oregon’s county clerks. Those local elected officials would then face the
task of notifying would-be voters of the opt-out process. The cost of that
notification could be construed as an unfunded mandate.
Through this opt-out process, a would-be voter
would then have 21 days to decline to register. Otherwise, according to the
current text of the bill, “the person’s electronic record and electronic
signature submitted…will constitute a completed registration card.”
Another section of the bill states that “the Secretary
of State shall adopt rules required to implement this section.” That provision enables
the Secretary of State’s office to create its own administrative rules.
That rulemaking process is largely independent
of the checks, balances, public participation and transparent deliberations
that are critical components of the legislative process. Rules can also be
changed without further action or oversight by the Legislative Assembly.
Unfortunately, this is not the only bill being
proposed this session that could have long-lasting, negative consequences for the
integrity of Oregon’s elections system.
HB
2465 was filed prior to the session at the request
of Gov. John Kitzhaber. It seeks to eliminate the requirement that an
Oregonian’s address change be noted on their driver’s license, permit or
identification card.
Under present law, the DMV simply sends a
sticker that can be affixed to the current license, permit or ID card, if an
Oregon resident changes their address. That process saves the person the trouble
of obtaining a new license and waiting in line at a DMV field office.
This bill also amends other existing statutes.
Current law states that DMV “shall” require at least one document to verify
address. HB 2465 changes the statutory wording to “may” require “proof.” It
then goes on to state that “the department shall adopt rules to identify what
constitutes proof of address.” In fact, there are multiple sections of the bill
that require the department to adopt its own rules.
Similar to HB 2177, this bill seeks to give
broad authority to a state agency to replace existing statute with
administrative rules that are established and can be changed without
legislative action or oversight. Citizens might rightfully ask why the
Legislature would authorize the Secretary of State’s office and bureaucrats at
the DMV to replace existing statute with administrative rules. Why would the Legislature
deliberately abdicate its key responsibility and duty of lawmaking?
The third bill in this trifecta is Senate
Joint Resolution 1. It proposes to amend the Oregon Constitution to allow
citizens to register to vote in an election not later than the day immediately
before the day of the election. It refers the amendment to the people for their
approval or rejection at the next general election.
A public hearing was held on HB 2177 in the
House Rules Committee on the first day of the legislative session. Testimony
was taken from a variety of citizens. Several issues were raised by the
citizens as well as by members of the committee.
Those issues include concerns about the ability
of the Secretary of State’s Office to adequately protect data containing
citizens’ personal information. That office has a poor track record of doing
so. A high-profile
data breach last year prompted the office’s website
to be shut down in the days and weeks leading up to the filing deadline for
persons seeking election to positions throughout the state. It complicated the
operations of one of the primary functions of the Secretary of State’s office,
that of running elections in Oregon.
Other concerns raised in the public hearing
include the ongoing lack of chain of custody for vote by mail ballots and the costs
that HB 2177 could have on struggling counties. Many counties are already
struggling to provide basic services such as law enforcement and would have a
difficult time meeting the terms of such an unfunded mandate.
The fact is, there is very little in the way
of obstacles preventing anyone who wants to participate in an election to
register to vote. Most citizens can accomplish that process online in a matter
of seconds.
It stands to reason that someone who hasn’t
already taken the very easy steps necessary to register is probably unlikely to
participate. I have significant concern regarding the chain of custody of all
these ballots that are unlikely to be used by the newly registered voters.
One can easily see the inherent pitfalls that
could accompany the passage of these bills in combination. Automatic voter registration,
allowing registration the day before an election, unknown new methods to keep
track of drivers and voters addresses, and unlimited agency rulemaking
authority could be a recipe for unmitigated election disaster.
Please remember--If we do not stand up for rural Oregon, no one will.
Best Regards,
Doug
Senate District 28
Email: Sen.DougWhitsett@state.or.us I Phone: 503-986-1728
Address: 900 Court St NE, S-311, Salem, OR, 97301
Website: http://www.oregonlegislature.gov/whitsett
| 
