MINUTES OF THE
SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS
Sixty-seventh Session
February 9, 1993
The Senate Committee on Government Affairs was called to order by Chairman Ann O'Connell, at 1:30 p.m., on Tuesday, February 9, 1993, in Room 207/208 of the Cashman Field Center, Las Vegas, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator Ann O'Connell, Chairman
Senator Sue Lowden, Vice Chairman
Senator William J. Raggio
Senator Dean A. Rhoads
Senator Thomas J. Hickey
Senator Leonard V. Nevin
Senator Matthew Q. Callister
Senator Lori L. Brown
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Caren Jenkins,
Diane Gamble, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Cheryl Lau, Secretary of State
Dale Erquiaga, Elections Deputy, Office of Secretary of State
Judy Dubois, Concerned Citizen
John Dubois, Concerned Citizen
Jan MacEachern, Concerned Citizen
Jim VanDell, Nevada Car Owners Association, Southern Region
James Sohns, President, Nevada Car Owners Association
Gary Walker, Concerned Citizen
Tamara Clark, State Chairman, I CARE-Libertarian Party
Mona Snape, Concerned Citizen
Richard Puckett, Chairman, Libertarian Party, Clark County
Alfred J. Ravell, Air Force Sergeant's Association
Mel Clark, First Vice Chairman, Libertarian Party
Joseph Maviglia, President, H&E Training Schools
Lucille Lusk, Chairman, Nevada Coalition of Conservative Citizens
Bill Parker, Clark County Election Board Officer
Mike DeFloria, Concerned Citizen
Tom McGowan, Concerned Citizen
Alta Bybee, Election Coordinator
Sigrid Macey, Concerned Citizen
Steve Billigmeier, Concerned Citizen
Chairman O'Connell opened the meeting on election reform. Senator Brown was asked to join the committee by a vote from the chair.
Cheryl Lau, Secretary of State, addressed the committee on this issue. Ms. Lau read from prepared testimony, see Exhibit C.
Ms. Lau explained to the committee she would like to go through this Bill Draft Request (BDR) 24-542. Ms. Lau presented the committee with a shorter summary of this BDR (Exhibit D).
BILL DRAFT REQUEST 24-542: Makes various changes concerning elections.
Ms. Lau continued to explain Exhibit C and Exhibit D with the committee.
Dale Erquiaga, Elections Deputy, Office of Secretary of State, spoke in support of BDR 24-542.
Judy Dubois, concerned citizen, told Mr. Eriquiaga the current law reads that no political subdivision of the state may change district boundaries in any year in which a general election is held. She stated there were precinct changes, precinct splits and precincts vacated during the height of the general and the primary election. She asked if the new proposed law would include stopping precinct splits as well as districts.
Mr. Erquiaga stated section 14 of BDR 24-542 would preclude a school board or a county commission board or in the rural counties, a hospital board from altering its districts. He added, by law, registrars do alter precincts during an election year. He explained what this section of the BDR will seek to do is correct one of the problems which occurred in the rural counties where, after candidate filing had closed, the board altered the line and removed a candidate from the district in which she had filed. Mr. Erquiaga stated once candidate filing has started they should not be allowed to move boundaries after that fact, which is currently allowable under the law. He explained this would not address the precinct problems Mrs. Dubois is referring to.
John Dubois, concerned citizen, told the committee there were three individuals who contested their elections this year in Nevada. He explained it was primarily an investigation of what happened in the election. He stated he and the two other individuals who contested their elections had no illusions of overturning the election results because the present election system makes that practically impossible. He continued saying:
Nor did we, in our investigation, come up with anything, nor did we intend to, concerning our opponents. Concerning any fraud or misconduct that might have been perpetrated actually by them. In our little informal ad hoc committee and in Senate District 8, my particular district, we spent, our little task force spent around 500 hours at the election department, 2,500 telephone calls were made to voters, election department workers, poll watchers and county officials. First class postcard mailing was mailed out to 3,725 absentee voters as a post-check and about 120 voter rosters were checked page-by-page and many had discrepancies found and they were xeroxed. At, I might add, at $1.00 per copy, which is what the election department charges. So we spent $400 or $500 dollars just in xerox. With all of this we were able to cover only about 1/5 of our district and we have tons of evidence which had been carted to Carson City for the January 18 meeting, which has never been viewed. We have copies of election documents, tapes, sworn statements, affidavits, again, it has never been viewed. That is the background for two or three or four recommendations that I would like to make and the first concern is the auditing of ballots. This I believe, and would recommend should be done by an outside CPA (certified public accountant) firm and done immediately after the final count. As you know, Commissioner Hayes requested that an audit be made and the request came about a month or so after the election and the audit was issued. This is an audit which is 3-1/2 pages of nothing. I showed this to my CPA firm and he said if he had spent 6, 7, 8, 10 or 12 weeks doing an audit and presented this to one of his clients he would wind up eventually with no clients. So, we consider this kind of a whitewash. Let me read one paragraph in this and it says here, and they are talking about the scope of it and the procedure that is to be followed, 'These agreed upon procedures are substantially less in scope than in examination. The objective of which is the expression of an opinion on financial statements or, in this case, the outcome of any particular election was affected by tampering or interference with the election process. Accordingly we do not express such an opinion.' So after all the work, naturally there is no opinion. Another problem with this audit, and I don't mean to sit here and knock it, I am sure there have got to be some good things about it somewhere, buried, but another aspect of it is that it was conducted in conjunction or in cooperation with the Clark County D.A.'s (district attorney) office and the Clark County Internal Audit Department so we have a case of the foxes looking after the hens. Now we have, as you know, problems that keep recurring throughout our electoral process and there absolutely is no oversight. This is an example of it. There is no consumer protection, the consumer in this case being the voter and as a result of this whole thing, everything that has been going on for over a decade now, the consumer confidence in the whole system is rapidly eroding.
Senator O'Connell stated it seemed strange to her that the election was certified before the audit even though the audit might not have been what it should have been. She asked, "Do we specify that it is a performance type audit and what would be your feelings since I know you have been so involved about the timing of the certification of the election?" She explained right now she felt it was pretty much a rubber stamp and that there is not a certain procedure that has gone through in order for it to be certified.
Mr. Dubois answered in addition to a quantitative analysis, he stated it should be a performance audit. He explained there are many laws which are good, but are not followed.
Senator O'Connell asked if Mr. Dubois were talking about a long period-of-time to do a performance audit, and is that something that could be done within a weeks time to certify the election. Mr. Dubois
stated the performance audits usually are very detailed and take quite some time, but he stated perhaps there could be some stipulation that an individual candidate could contest his election and then allow a specific time for the audit to be made public.
Senator O'Connell asked if the criteria for the certification of an election be spelled out in the law. Mr. Dubois stated he felt it should even if it necessitates delaying certification of the election.
Mr. Dubois addressed the committee saying:
This whole thing of certification is really sort of a farce, if I may use that term. What happens is, you have the election department and they come out with an abstract, computer printout and that is it. They then present that to the Clark County Commission, they look over the numbers and they have no way of challenging anything so they accept those numbers, they virtually have to. What happened in the last election is that some of us went down there to object before they canvassed the election, before they approved it, but they approved it before they allowed us to speak. So, they did not allow any public input. So the Clark County Commission within 5 days, by law, virtually automatically approves the election. What they really are doing is approving a part of county government over which they have control. And they are not going to go against it, that is not human nature. Then those figures go up to 17 county election districts. They go to the secretary of state, she has no choice but to look over the numbers and approve them. She has no oversight capabilities. The next farce is it goes to the supreme court, the Nevada Supreme Court and I am not stating that the supreme court members are farcical in any manner, it is just the system. They sit there and they read off the numbers supplied to them for the 17 counties and then they agree upon it and certify the whole election. So it comes back to where? The election department and the numbers they originally come out with in their abstract and there is no challenge to that. And that is a basic problem in our whole system. If a legislator or candidate for legislative office wants to challenge his seat, he then waits until the opening of either body that he is running for, senate or assembly, and they must present his material and we all know what happens in those cases. So there is no really redress and something should be done on that.
Senator Hickey asked if Mr. Dubois is proposing an outside CPA firm be used and an audit of system performance be done. Mr. Dubois stated he is proposing an audit of both the numbers and the performance. Senator Hickey asked when the performance audit would be used. Mr. Dubois stated he visualizes they commence within 24 hours after every election. Senator Hickey asked who would pay for that audit. Mr. Dubois suggested each individual county. He added this may be cheaper than paying $115,000 for a report that apparently was never used.
Mr. Dubois stated Nevada Revised Statute (NRS) 293.391, section 1, states that all materials must be deposited in the vaults of the county clerk and preserved for 22 months and then destroyed. He added they are very well preserved and no one can get into them. Mr. Dubois further explained NRS 293.391, section 3, states that a contestant may inspect all material except the ballots. He stated he feels this is like allowing the police to inspect all aspects of a murder except the murder weapon. Mr. Dubois feels this should be changed and there should be some sort of access.
Senator Nevin asked Mr. Dubois if the ballots in Clark County are numbered. Mr. Dubois stated the stub is numbered, but the ballot is blank or it would be possible to match up the stub with the ballot and therefore know how an individual voted.
Jan MacEachern, concerned citizen, stated the bottom section of the ballot is identified. She explained it does not have a number on it but one of the holes at the bottom tells you what precinct it is being voted in and another hole describes the district.
Mr. Dubois stated Senator O'Connell had a bill in a prior session which covered a whole trail of ballot auditing. This was Senate Bill 241 of the Sixty-fifth Session.
SENATE BILL 241 OF THE SIXTY-FIFTH SESSION: Provides additional remedy for misrepresenting or concealing material fact to obtain industrial insurance benefits.
Mr. Dubois used a voter Mail-In Registration Application to show the committee the areas where fraud are easily implemented (Exhibit E). Mr. Dubois stated the mail-in applications cause fraud and therefore need to be dealt with in NRS 293.272 to close the loophole.
Mr. Dubois stated since 1991 it has been law that each absentee voter must vote in person for their first election. Mr. Dubois explained this did not happen. He stated in his investigation of the election of 1992 there were hundreds of voters who did not comply with this law.
Mr. Dubois told the committee the absentee-voting became so loose the state is losing its integrity of the absentee voting system.
In closing his statement, Mr. Dubois told the committee the perception of the majority of voters feel is the 1992 election was fraught with discrepancies, irregularities, cover-ups, deception, misconduct, misfeasance, malfeasance and potential problems.
Jim VanDell, Nevada Car Owners Association, Southern Region, spoke to the committee on election reform. He stated it was unfortunate, an injured candidate through potential election fraud, has to plead his whole case right here. He stated the whole case should have been heard in Carson City on January 18 and 19.
He explained the whole concept of the Clark County District Attorney's Office or the Clark County existing grand jury investigating the allegations of election fraud and an election ballot audit, was not done properly, at least by normal business standards.
Mr. VanDell stated he would like to see the legislature spend $50,000 and initiate an actual independent investigation of election fraud in Clark County. He further explained this should include the registrar of voters, the individuals who work under this individual and then to pull the whole thing together, get it into an actual grand jury investigation. Mr. VanDell stated he felt the Metropolitan Police Department has not been able to do this effectively nor could it. He also stated he felt the county commission has not been fair and proper in the beginning when they certified the election in the face of a challenge.
Mr. VanDell told the committee he felt the election reform was very commendable and the secretary of state's bill draft contains many of the issues he feels needs to be done in the future, but he stated the State of Nevada cannot afford to allow reform for the future until they find out what did happen in the 1992 election.
Mr. VanDell asked the committee how an election department could misplace 1,500 ballots for 2 days. He stated something is wrong.
Mr. VanDell stated he would like to discuss Assembly Bill (A.B.) 106.
ASSEMBLY BILL 106: Allows high school pupils in certain counties to act as trainees for position of election board officer.
Senator O'Connell told Mr. VanDell A.B. 106 is an assembly bill and had not reached this committee thus far, therefore, she suggested they save that discussion for another time.
Mr. VanDell spoke to the committee about Assembly Joint Resolution (A.J.R.) 6.
Assembly Joint Resolution 6: Proposes to amend Nevada constitution to require that petition for recall of public officer contain signatures of certain number of registered voters.
Mr. VanDell stated he hoped the recall petition drive is being upheld and would ultimately result in a recall election. He said he had a strong opposition to the rule that an individual must wait 6 months after the election of a public servant before a recall petition could even be initiated. Mr. VanDell stated the recall effort should be allowed immediately after the election or no longer than 30 days afterwards. Mr. VanDell thanked the committee for their time.
Alfred J. Ravell, Trustee, Air Force Sergeant's Association, spoke on election reform. He stated:
I am not a long-winded politician and I am not a business man, I am retired. And for the past 10 years I have been a deputy voter registrar and an election board officer. I am getting tired of hearing people throwing dirt at the registrars and the election board officers. Back in the election in [19] 90 when they had all the difficulty, the reason they tried to put the blame on the registrars, or the election board officers rather, and what it was, there was approximately 30,000 sample ballots that were never sent out. One of them that did not get her sample ballot was my wife and she is also an election board officer. They tried to blame us because we had thousands of people coming into the polling places asking us, 'Where do I vote?.' They had no idea where they voted or who they were voting for. That blame they tried to place on the rest of us. They said, 'Oh, we didn't have any experience.' I had already had about 6 years experience doing that and so did everybody else that I knew of. The next thing is what Mr. Dubois brought up about the trouble he had. He got information given to him at the polling places. Either he was given the wrong information or he is fabricating stories. I have worked three different polling places and I have never, not once had any trouble with poll watchers or anybody else. The last election, I do right now. I work at the O.K. Adcock School, I am the coordinator there. We had two people come as poll watchers, they looked like the party had gone on skid row and picked them up and that is exactly what they looked like. They sat over on the steps of the stage for the whole time, they didn't do anything, they didn't keep records or nothing, they just sat there. The other thing, the one thing that started this problem was in the [19] 91 legislative session, whey they passed that bill allowing people to register by mail, they opened the state, county and city, wide open to fraud. I would venture to say that you have as many people voting this year that are in the graveyard. We have become another Chicago. How many votes do you want for this precinct? I can get them for you. When they had that vote-by-mail, that opened it up because there is absolutely no proof of who signs these. That should be the first agenda on your legislative session, repeal that law immediately and make everybody that wants to register to vote present a valid Nevada driver's license. The other thing is, I have done it many a time, voted for the republic party and the registrars office. I have been called, this was before they came out with that form, the mail-in form. I have been called an ass and I know a lot of other registrars have been. Please go to such and such a person's home. They are incapacitated, they want to register to vote and I have done it. We get a lousy 10 cents apiece for the affidavits and it is not a hell of a lot and I am satisfied with it because we do this as a community service. I ran voter registrations for 6 years at the Meadows Mall. A lot of people have seen me there and a lot have seen the people that work for me there. We do it under the banner of the Air Force Sergeant's Association, a nonprofit organization. And we do it as a community service. We don't expect to get paid for it and I understand Myrna Williams is proposing we get $85 per week for doing this. I have already had six people tell me, who have worked for me before, they said if they want to put us on the books, pay us and everything, they can forget it, we will not work. So, kill that vote-by-mail and you will eliminate 90 percent of your problems right there. And the coordinator that they have at each polling place, he is responsible, he or she is responsible for the conduct of your poll watchers and they have the right and they have been told they have the right. If one of those poll watchers steps out of line, there is the door, get lost. And I threatened one one time with just that action. But, I have never had to do it since and I am not afraid to do either. Because all we have to do, we have the cellular phone there now, with the county worker that works with us, and I'm telling you that is the best thing they have ever done. My hats off to the county for doing that. That is all I have to say, thank you.
Senator O'Connell asked if there were anybody else to testify.
James Sohns, President, Nevada Car Owners Association, addressed the committee on election reform. He stated he has lived in Las Vegas for 7 years and is proud to be here except for the last election which he stated made him ill. He told the committee he could not believe there was a $2 bounty being paid for signatures.
Mr. Sohns stated he used to live in Honolulu, Hawaii and they have an open primary which he feels works very well. He explained he has volunteered his services as he is retired and nobody has taken him up on his offer. He stated that was all of his comments.
Gary Walker, Concerned Citizen, spoke on election reform. He stated he was a candidate for the senate in the 1992 elections. He explained it was the first time he ran for a political office in his life as he is a retired military officer. He told the committee he did not contest his election, but given the circumstances, if he were a candidate again he would contest the election. he stated the reason for this is at this point, it is impossible to determine what would be a frivolous contest or not since the information is not available to base any kind of an investigation as to whether there was fraud in an election.
Mr. Walker stated while working on the informal task force after the election, he did become familiar with some of the computers. He stated this technology is approximately 30 years old and these were designed to accurately tabulate votes and not designed to safeguard against fraud. He explained the software that is involved with that computer system is proprietary to the company which is rather unusual inasmuch as it is a very standard kind of software that any computer-literate high school student could come up with.
Mr. Walker stated the last four columns on the ballot identify the precinct, election and that sort of thing. He did state one of the things that was not addressed, but he believes needs to be addressed is with regard to the secondary coding which is done to the software after it reaches Clark County and with respect to the specific election. He explained the elections are not built from the ground level each time. He did state over a period of years there has been the authority being removed from the precinct level from workers who actually used to do the counting of the ballots and the reporting of the ballots and then reported them to whoever was in charge, possibly the county clerk. He pointed out we have fewer and fewer people with more and more authority, but we have the same county commissioners who are the same people they were 30 years ago.
He explained there are some specific items he feels need to be covered. The first is either administratively or through statute that the coding of the ballots ought to be done by more than one individual. He stated it is imminently possible for a literate computer programmer to set those cards and to mark any ballot, which could completely change the election results.
Mr. Walker told the committee another thing he would like changed is the names on the ballots. He explained, the placement of the candidates names, they are alphabetical and in virtually every other state and any other political jurisdiction outside Nevada, they do not appear alphabetically year after year. He stated the last item he is concerned about is the layout of the ballots. He pointed out some of the ballots have no blanks to select a candidate out of each race.
Mr. Walker told the committee he felt volunteers are the heart of the system and he would like to see them given some kind of recognition for what they do.
Senator Nevin stated he understood Mr. Walker's point, but he stated Clark County has had problems in the last two elections and he added Northern Nevada does not have the same problem. Therefore, he stated he felt the problem was internal and within the management of the elections. Senator Nevin iterated he felt it was a shame the legislature has to pass a state law to help solve a problem within a county.
Tamara Clark, State Chairman, I CARE-Libertarian Party, spoke on election reform. She stated she is a candidate and a citizen who has spent over $30,000 since November 3, 1992, to investigate the elections in Clark County. Mrs. Clark stated the majority of problems exist within the election department.
Mrs. Clark stated the problem was dramatic in the absentee ballots and in the mail-in registration. She stated the laws are in existence today, but the election department and district attorney's office chose to ignore those laws. She pointed out writing more laws is not going to make a difference if the citizens are not willing to uphold the laws. Mrs. Clark iterated this did not only happen on a county level, it happened when she went to the state senate and asked them to hear the laws that were violated and she stated she was told the committee was too tired to hear what she had to say.
Mrs. Clark told the committee they need to throw out the circulator qualification for petition. She states this is one of the biggest problems. She explained if a citizen signs a petition and their signature matches their photo registration, then that citizen intentionally put that name on the petition. And regardless of who circulated the petition, the citizen signed it and wanted his name to be there and counted. Therefore, she stated the circulator is a terrible problem which caused most of the petitions in this state to fail this year. Mrs. Clark stated in going back and looking at the different situations, the failure was due to either the election department not knowing their correct numbers and giving false information and the petition person then being told, "We apologize that they gave you the wrong information, but you are tough out of luck." She told the committee that is wrong. She urged if an elected official makes a mistake they are accountable, not the citizens that are suffering for it.
Mrs. Clark stated there have been problems with poll watchers beyond a shadow of a doubt. She explained poll watchers were originally put at the polls to say whether or not someone is who they say when they are voting in certain districts. She would like to see the poll watchers become legitimate again.
Mrs. Clark stated one of the big problems in Clark County's Election Department was keeping track of ballots. She explained they had talked to hundreds and hundreds of poll workers, citizens, voters and transfer workers who felt the system was set up this year to safeguard the ballots, so individuals working the election polls were inconvenienced as little as possible. She stated she felt they should do away with the transfer stations and just have one station, such as Cashman Field, where they drop off their ballots so they are not passing through so many hands before being counted.
Mrs. Clark stated she went to the Clark County Commission to tell them prior to certifying the election there were problems, but they certified the election and then asked if there was anybody who wanted to say anything to them regarding the election issue.
Mrs. Clark stated the secretary of state's proposal has a section in it which is very important to her. She states the secretary of state has put forward, a minor party candidate must file for candidacy by the second week of February and the other political parties must file theirs by March. She explained the minor party candidates do not know if they have ballot access until August, plus they have to hold a convention to nominate the candidates, which means they must hold the convention in November, a year before the election to choose the candidates at least 3 months before anybody else has to file. She did state she realizes this is being done because individuals were angry that minor party candidates got to come in and file after everybody else. She stated this was not their choice, it is because the law constitutes they must have a convention, which has to be done in a particular matter because they do not hold primaries. Now, she states, this proposal is asking the minor parties to have their candidates ready a year before election.
Senator O'Connell stated she has asked for legislation which will treat every party the same.
Senator Nevin stated he checked on this also and he told her he felt she would not be able to do anything about it because it is a United States Supreme Court decision and state government cannot overturn U.S. Supreme Court decisions. He stated they could pass the legislation but it would not be constitutional. Mrs. Clark stated the minor parties will be held to it and she guarantees they will be the ones who will have to take it to court to say it is unconstitutional.
Mrs. Clark stated she had no objections to file candidacy at the same times the other parties do, she would be happy with that.
Mrs. Clark stated she could not be at the meeting last week when the committee discussed Senate Bill 94.
SENATE BILL 94: Requests that grand jury investigate allegations of misconduct related to general election of 1992 in Clark County.
She told the committee had she been here she would have told them the Clark County District Attorney's Office has shown an extreme interest in not bringing this forward as have the Clark County Police Department. She added not one of them has ever bothered to speak to the citizens who are investigating this.
Mrs. Clark emphasized the election department is wrong and the individuals working in the election department were wrong, but she states they have an attitude they are superior to the citizens they
are there to help. She added they would not be there long and that her organization will start at the top and will work their way down even though they know it will take some time. Mrs. Clark asked the committee for help as they have the power to help.
Mona Snape, Concerned Citizen, spoke on the election reform. She state:
There are currently 16 statutes on the book giving the secretary of state authority to regulate our elections. Our elections are not simply little things that are done by counties or cities. We have a good strong election code that needs to be enforced. For example, one of the most maddening things I can think of is the stand-in. I can't go over this enough. we have a law, we have stated the law. Since last July, the Citizen's Coalition Groups of different members have been before everyone saying this is it and lets do it right. It has been absolutely ridiculous. But, the secretary of state again, and her proposals, for some odd reason does not seem to be able to determine the difference between statutory law or constitutional laws regarding the time frames that she proposes on initiative and referendum petition. The problems that have gone on with initiative and referendum and recall petitions around this county is horrendous. The attitude that we receive from the election department when we walk in there, when one walks in to the Secretary of State's Office to file a petition, they can't get the information. When they do receive the handbook, the handbooks are legally in error and legally flawed. They have regulations which far exceed any statutory or constitutional requirements. This is all in the petition package that went forward to a lot of the senators and a lot of the assemblymen and the Secretary of State's Office. Again, these groups have harped and harped, added volume as to the problem and no one has listened.
Mrs. Snape then referred to her handout and went over the material with the committee (Exhibit F, the original is on file in the research library.
Mel Clark, First Vice Chairman, Libertarian Party, spoke on election reform. He stated essentially what the committee needs to do is enforce the existing laws. He explained the committee needs to get within the election department, find out how the process was done and correct it from there.
Mr. Clark stated he would like to see some changes in the existing rules such as the rule that minor parties cannot work bowling alleys and he states that is a discrimination because democrats and republicans are allowed to do so. He did suggest to the committee the people who spoke at this meeting probably have firsthand information and you can pretty much believe what they are saying. He did say, however, they need to look at both sides to come to a fair conclusion.
Richard Puckett, Chairman, Libertarian Party, Clark County, spoke to the committee on election reform. He told the committee he appreciated them coming down to Las Vegas to hear them.
Mr. Puckett stated after all of the testimony today they still do not have an idea of how many absentee requests were made and how many absentees actually voted on a precinct breakdown basis. Mr. Puckett stated he would like the numbers to analyze the information and determine if there was an unusual amount. He stated, as was mentioned before, one of the laws that needs to be changed or enforced is the reconciliation between the poll books and the official abstracts. He told the committee he helped with the computer analysis investigation and in his investigation he noticed they counted up the individuals who voted in the poll books. He stated that includes those who walked in, went to the election department, voted by mail and voted by absentee. He said comparing that to the official computer abstracts which were approved by the county commission and the supreme court, there was a discrepancy. Mr. Puckett stated he looked through the computer log which shows the activity that happened with the election computer, every vote that was counted on election night and he stated that number was off. Mr. Puckett pointed out the abstract supposedly was generated from the computer and yet the numbers were different between the abstract and the computer count. He stated he would like to know how many votes were cast in each precinct.
Mr. Puckett expressed to the committee his desire to have a change in Nevada Revised Statutes 293.410 2-D where it states "That the election board, in conducting the election or in canvassing the returns, made errors sufficient to change the result of the election as to any person who has been declared elected." He stated when he went before the senate he had massive evidence of malfeasance on the part of the election department which was their case and that was grounds to bring our case forward. It was decided by the credentials committee the only valid grounds were to prove a certain number of votes went to a different candidate than it should have. He explained this is a very difficult standard to contest the election, but he did state what would be a fair solution would be if a contestant could prove sufficiently there was a flawed election, there should be a new election for the individual who contested it.
Senator Hickey stated the election loser can contest the election by formal contest or he can take it into court. He explained the system may be cumbersome or not, but to bring it directly into the state senate is awkward, so he suggests there is some way a system can allow an election to be contested.
Mr. Puckett suggested if the secretary of state was given enough investigative and enforcement powers and an individual could prove the county department made sufficient errors, the secretary of state may have the ability to declare the election bad and run a new election.
Senator Hickey asked Mr. Puckett if he would feel more comfortable having the secretary of state as an arbitrary. Mr. Puckett stated he felt the secretary of state is far enough removed from the county and has no vested interest in the county elections and therefore would be fair in looking at the evidence.
Mr. Puckett concluded by telling the committee 87,655 ballots were counted after the canvassers were sent home at 1:00 a.m. and he stated whether there was a law against that or not, there should be a law stating no ballots will be counted if canvassers are not there to make sure everything is done fairly.
Joseph Maviglia, President, H&E Training Schools, spoke to the committee regarding election reform. Mr. Maviglia stated he was addressing Senator Lowden because she was a new member of the state senate. He told her she would see lobbyists sell their souls for votes and he stated he felt we were losing our country. He said as a citizen to come forward and complain about the injustices in our government, they are shouted down, arrested, handcuffed, intimidated and abused even when the complaints are legitimate. Mr. Maviglia stated sometimes the complaints are idiotic out of frustration. He explained sometimes individuals come forward to learn how to present themselves so our representatives will pay attention to us and our concerns. He stated sometimes individuals must jump in the face of the elected officials so they will respond, but through that response they have been able to bring forward their complaints and have them looked at in a justifiable manner. Mr. Maviglia stated he is an ex-convict. When he was younger he was frustrated with his lack of education so he went the opposite way of the law. Now, he explains he is trying to become an honest, law abiding citizen and he is chastised for his past by officials because they cannot stand the truth. Mr. Maviglia stated there is no accusation nor aspersions against these committee members. He told the committee they will go away from here and maybe they will remember Joe Maviglia or maybe they will not, but he stated he will not let them forget him.
Mr. Maviglia stated the 1990 and 1992 ballots were the same color and that should have been enough probable cause for the district attorney or secretary of state rule the election invalid. He asked the committee to help reform these election laws.
Senator O'Connell asked Mr. Maviglia if he would support an administrative court. Mr. Maviglia stated he would support an administrative court if it was not stacked.
Lucille Lusk, Chairman, Nevada Coalition of Conservative Citizens, spoke to the committee on election reform. She made reference to Exhibit D. On page 1 she suggested they insert what is acceptable identification as required in this section. Also, on page 3 under the primary elections she commented open primaries have worked very well in many states and she asked that the committee seriously consider this recommendation. She stated she had extreme concern with the last paragraph on page 3 where it states the verification of signatures on petitions may be witnessed by the person who submits the petition or by the public officer who is the subject of the recall. She explained it seemed obvious to her if the public officer who is subject to the recall is allowed to be the person who witnesses the verification of signatures on the recall, particularly against a county commissioner who oversees election department employees, it is absolutely ripe for fraud. She continued telling the committee under no circumstances should the individual being considered for recall be the witness for verification.
Mrs. Lusk stated on page 4 of Exhibit D, with regard to "None of these candidates", there is a tremendous interest in having this an available option in many races. However, she stated the solution being offered in this exhibit does not respond to the public's desire. She explained if "none of these candidates" receives more votes than any other candidate then the options for seating a person are not acceptable.
Senator Lowden told Mrs. Lusk the proposal for "none of these candidates" and the resolution to the problem came out of a town meeting held by Secretary of State, Cheryl Lau.
Bill Parker, Clark County Election Board Officer, spoke to the committee on election reform. He addressed the issue of addresses. Senator Nevin had said nobody lives at a post office box and that is true, but Mr. Parker stated for security reasons he receives his registration materials at a post office box, but he resides within a house. He stated the registration forms have provisions on them so you can have a mailing address and a physical address. He explained the physical address is what should be checked to make sure the person lives at that address.
Mr. Parker explained he had programmed computers for 10 years and he feels it is not beyond the realm of possibility that an individual could tamper with machines. He stated he did not have a problem with a second person verifying a code that goes into the machine.
Mr. Parker told the committee on election day he was coordinator at Woodbury Junior High polling place which encompassed Paradise 6, Paradise 12, Desert Hills 4 and a few other precincts along the way.
He explained his day started at 5:00 a.m. that morning and by the time he got done, it was 9:15 p.m. He stated the provision to move the satellite receiving centers will not solve the problems.
Mr. Parker told the committee any time you have human beings as part of the process, errors are going to occur. He iterated there were two types of errors, deliberate and unintentional. He stated the missing 1500 ballots was, in his opinion, simply human error. He remarked how much responsibility the voters should have and how much responsibility state government and the elections department have. He surmised it becomes easy to complain about the process, but nobody can offer permanent fixes or good solutions to problems, then it becomes more of a problem.
Senator Hickey stated it had been suggested by someone that the coding of the ballots be done by more than one person and he asked Mr. Parker what he thought of that idea. Mr. Parker explained he has no problem with marking the ballots with the date specifying the year and he recommends that strongly.
Mr. Puckett again came up to the microphone to help answer Senator Hickey's question regarding the coding of ballots and specific software for the computers. Mr. Puckett suggested no computer modem lines should be connected to the computer on election night. His understanding was there were several terminals connected to the computer that did the counting on election night and he stated that can lead to potential for abuse.
Mr. Parker explained what Mr. Puckett is referring to is the fact that basically computers talk to one another in remote locations over telephone lines. This is basically known as telecommunications. He stated what Mr. Puckett is concerned about someone tampering with the data as it is being transmitted and he stated this has happened in the past.
Mike DeFloria, Concerned Citizen, spoke to the committee on election reform. Mr. DeFloria stated he has been a resident of Las Vegas for 30 years and he has seen it go from bad to worse to disastrous. He told the committee election boards are too lax and nobody cares. He stated his opinion was the election reform problems are not going to be solved.
Tom McGowan, Concerned Citizen, testified on election reform. He stated he represented no organization and he is here as a loyal American citizen and he told the committee his purpose is to achieve a massive fundamental reform of society and government in the State of Nevada, inclusively in the broad-based public interest of the people of Nevada and the United States of America. He stated he had no other purpose at this meeting, personal or otherwise.
Mr. McGowan stated Deputy Registrar Doug Leavitt is recognized as an expert professional in his field, yet he fails to expertly inform recall petitioners of accurate data requisite to their position. Mr. McGowan stated this was either grossly incompetent or deliberately remiss and adverse to the public interest and therefore, he should summarily be terminated and permanently prohibited from further service in public government.
Mr. McGowan stated the following:
I hereby formally request that you immediately initiate and diligently expedite a formal legislative demand for an independent federal investigation of each and all elections, pertinent elements of government in the State of Nevada and Clark County inclusively. Said investigation to be maintained as separate and distinct from and secure from any persuasive influence by any and all entities in the public government and the private sectors of the State of Nevada inclusively. There is a very good reason for that. I no longer, personally, speaking for myself, trust anybody in this state, public or private. My frank opinion is this is one of the most unsophisticated societies I have ever encountered in my short life of sixty-some years. I am appalled. If this is reiterated nationwide, we don't have a nation and I don't want to pursue that further, but I will say there is still a window of hope that springs eternal, from the words of Sam Irvin. It is a matter of individual responsibility regardless of what level we are at. That includes everybody. When the legislature could fail to comply with this public request for an independent government investigation, I would request that you either resign immediately or stand fully liable to recall on the basis of your failure to exercise the mandate of responsible government to the broad-based public interest. There is very little else to say. There is nothing mistaken about what takes place in the state day-to-day, night-to-night, nothing. You've had 61 years plus as a legalized gaming state to become, not the solemn State of Nevada but the casino gaming industries State of Nevada. You need to change that. If you think you can't do it, think twice. You're overdependent upon a single industry, that is probably the crux issue and basis for all of these problems, all of these problems, specifically election reform. If you can't create and maintain a responsible government in a rational society, go home, bother somebody else. And that is inclusive of everybody in this state. Thank you for your time.
Jan MacEachern, Concerned Citizen, addressed the committee on election reform. She stated she is against paying registrars for signing up voters. She suggested the committee take all of the suggestions and the bill drafts and put them together to introduce one bill. She also suggested the state leave primaries open. Another complaint she had was regarding poll watchers. She explained the poll watchers are suppose to stay 6 feet away from the voting table and they were not to interfere. She thanked the committee for coming to Las Vegas and hearing this testimony.
Alta Bybee, Election Coordinator, spoke to the committee on election reform. She stated she has lived in Nevada for better than 60 years and she has been a resident of Las Vegas for 15 years. She pointed out since politicians running for office would not admit what party they were running for, then she asked, why should she have to claim a political party when she registers to vote.
Senator Hickey stated the law allows any individual to register as an independent and not claim a political party. Mrs. Bybee said she felt it was manipulated by particular political parties.
Mrs. Bybee pointed out most of the volunteers at the polls are elderly people who have to drive downtown late at night. She suggested they try to use the satellites to prevent some of this late night traveling. Mrs. Bybee told the committee Clark County is having this election problem because of their large population boom. She thanked the committee for their time.
Sigrid Macey, Concerned Citizen, addressed the committee on election reform. She stated she was concerned about post-adolescents are the ones who will decide if signatures are valid or not. She added only a graphologist would be qualified to do that. She agrees with Mrs. Bybee with regard to eliminating party affiliations when an individual registers to vote.
Steve Billigmeier, Concerned Citizen, spoke to the committee on election reform. He asked the committee to schedule another day for hearing this issue. He also suggested the committee go to a Clark County Commissioners meeting and see how they act.
Mr. Maviglia came forward and stated:
Senator, I would just like to bring something to your attention. I was threatened during the times prior to my coming forward by ex-Senator [Assemblyman] Dubois. He handed me a note and he said, 'Be careful what you say or we will have you handcuffed and thrown into the street.'
Senator O'Connell told Mr. Maviglia stated Mr. Dubois did not mean it. Mr. Maviglia stated he did not know how Mr. Dubois meant it, but the fact that he did give him the note upset him and he would like it on the record.
There being no further business, Chairman O'Connell closed the meeting at 6:17 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Tanya Morrison,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator Ann O'Connell, Chairman
DATE:
??
Senate Committee on Government Affairs
February 9, 1993
Page 1