June, 28 2010, 05:07pm EDT

New York's New Voting System Procedure Could Cost Tens of Thousands of Lost Votes
And Disproportionately Impact Communities of Color
NEW YORK
The Brennan Center for Justice, New York State Conference NAACP, the
National Coalition on Black Civic Participation, Families United For
Racial and Economic Equality, the Working Family Party, and many other
civil rights, voting rights, good government groups and advocates called
for the New York State and City Boards to take a simple step that will
prevent tens of thousands of votes from being lost this fall.
New York State is about to use new voting systems for the first time
this fall. Under the new system voters will fill out a paper ballot and
then "scan" them into an electronic machine. The State and City Boards
have setup the new machines so that they do not give voters adequate
warning of "overvotes"- ballots that cannot be read in full because the
machine reads the ballot as having too many votes for a particular
contest. Instead of returning the ballot, as is done in many other
jurisdictions, in New York the ballot will be retained, and a computer
screen with present the voter with a confusing message that includes a
green "cast" button. Voters are not told if they press the green button,
their vote will not count.
The only other time these voting machines have been used in the same
way in a major election (13 counties in Florida in 2008), they produced
overvote rates almost 14 times higher than expected, with thousands of
votes for the presidential contest rejected - in comparison to almost no
votes rejected in the 36 counties that automatically returned the
ballots. Evidence shows that African Americans and Latinos, in
particular, were disproportionately impacted by the lack of overvote
protection.
The State and City Board can fix this problem by checking a box in
the setup files that would automatically reject overvoted ballots.
Despite numerous attempts by the Brennan Center and other voting rights
groups to make this change, they have not done so.
Consequently, today, the Brennan Center and its pro bono counsel
Jenner & Block LLP are filing the complaint on behalf of the New
York State Conference NAACP, the National Coalition on Black Civic
Participation, Families United For Racial and Economic Equality, the
Working Family Party and others to force them to ensure that there are
proper overvote protections on the new voting machines.
In today's New York Times, New York State Election Board
spokespersons took issue with the Brennan Center's proposed fix, arguing
that in order to reset the machines, it would take a months of testing
and that they would have to re-program thousands of machines.
"This is simply inaccurate," said Brennan Center senior counsel
Lawrence Norden. "Numerous sources, including the State Board, the
voting machine vendor and independent computer scientists have confirmed
to us that requiring the machines to return overvote ballots requires
only "checking a box" in the setup file for these systems. These
machines were built to allow the City and State Board to do this at
anytime. It will not cause delay to do the right thing."
"Plaintiffs are bringing this action to prevent State and City
officials from setting newly purchased voting machines in a way that
will dramatically increase the likelihood that tens of thousands of
votes are lost as a result of 'overvoting,'" said Jeremy Creelan,
partner at Jenner & Block. "In particular, plaintiffs seek to
prevent the disenfranchisement of racial and language minorities, who
are disproportionately likely to lose their votes as a result of
Defendants' new procedure."
"The State Board knows there's a problem with the way they set up
these voting machines, and that it's going to mean the loss of thousands
of votes for the elderly and people of color," said Hazel N. Dukes,
president of plaintiff the New York State Conference of the NAACP and
plaintiff in the case. "They also know there's an easy fix that would
save thousands of votes in New York City, Albany, Erie County and
elsewhere. They should make the change, and the New York City Board of
Elections should tell them to make that change."
"The solution is simple," added Monifa Bandele of NCBCP. "Have voting
machines automatically reject over-voted ballots, so that voters can
start again."
"In order for our country to carry out the important principle that
every vote should count, we should be using our machines in a way that
will ensure that, and not in a way that will disenfranchise voters,"
said Valery Jean of Families United for Racial and Economic Equality.
The Brennan Center has also compiled additional statements of support
of the suit:
Manhattan Borough President Scott M. Stringer
"Instead of making it easier for New Yorkers to have their voices
heard on Election Day, this new voting machine system turns our ballot
into an exam and silences the vote of any New Yorker who inadvertently
selects too many candidates. If the NYSBOE insists on running our
elections as though voters go to the polls intent on casting an invalid
ballot, then a lawsuit of this kind is necessary."
Aimee Allaud, Elections Specialist, League of Women Voters of
New York State
"A voter with an overvote error on her ballot should be given the
opportunity to correct her ballot before casting it. If the voting
machine is not set so that it automatically rejects an overvoted ballot,
many voters may be disenfranchised. This potential should be eliminated
by simply configuring the voting machine so that an overvoted ballot is
rejected and the voter can correct the error."
Bill DeBlasio, Public Advocate, City of New York
"Our democracy fails when voters are disenfranchised. Less than 80
days before primaries, our state's electronic voting machines contain
fixable flaws that could easily disrupt our elections. The Board of
Elections has an obligation to fix the problem before it's too late."
Margaret Fung, Executive Director, Asian American Legal
Defense and Education Fund
"I think we're all especially concerned that the training of poll
workers and education of Asian-language voters are going to be huge
issues with respect to the new voting machines. So, it's critical to
deal with this overvote issue to avoid further problems."
Susan Lerner, Executive Director, Common Cause/NY
"In deciding to ignore the standard procedure for dealing with
overvotes, The State Board of Elections seems to be confused about the
purpose of conducting an election. While everyone wants to be sure that
voters are not subjected to unnecessary delays and inefficiencies on
Election Day, people do not vote in order to have a good voting
'experience', they vote in order to have their vote counted. It is a
shame that it is necessary to file a lawsuit in order to force our
election authorities to use good common sense and ensure that the votes
that are cast are cast in a way that ensures they will be counted."
Bo Lipari, Founder, New Yorkers for Verified Voting
"New York's voting machines should provide voters with every
opportunity to change mistakes on their ballot. Returning the ballot in
the event of an overvote is an important way to inform voters of a
problem."
"Changing the scanners to return an overvoted ballot only requires
flipping a switch in a settings file. At startup, the scanner reads this
file to determine, among other things, whether an overvoted ballot
should be returned or retained. This change does not require
reprogramming the machine software in any way, and will not cause any
delay in preparation for the upcoming elections."
Rima McCoy, Voting Rights Coordinator, Center for
Independence of the Disabled, New York
"Voters with disabilities who need accommodations to cast their
ballots may lose their hard won private and independent vote over a
technicality that the Board of Elections could easily solve. Poll
workers coping with learning the ropes of a new voting system may be too
overwhelmed to help voters understand an over-vote message on the
scanner. Now that those of us with disabilities finally have a voting
system that allows us to cast our ballots like everyone else, it would
be painfully ironic to lose our vote due to a confusing over-vote
procedure that is easy to fix. The BOE must do everything in its power
to ensure that every vote counts."
Neal Rosenstein, Election Specialist, New York Public
Interest Research Group
"By refusing to configure new optical scan tabulators to make it
easier for voters to understand and correct mistakes on their ballots,
the Board will cause countless thousands upon thousands of lost votes.
Perhaps they should also rename themselves the Board of Rejections."
Marjorie Kelleher Shea, Director at Large, Women's City Club
of New York
"New Yorkers should be able to correct mistakes as they cast their
ballots on the new machines. State law says that if voters mark their
ballots for more than one candidate for a single office, i.e.
'overvote,' they should be notified and given a chance to privately and
independently change it before the ballot is scanned and counted. To do
less disqualifies voters."
For more information, please contact Jeanine Plant-Chirlin at
212-998-6289 or 646-265-7721 or jeanine.plant-chirlin@nyu.edu.
The Brennan Center for Justice is a nonpartisan law and policy institute. We strive to uphold the values of democracy. We stand for equal justice and the rule of law. We work to craft and advance reforms that will make American democracy work, for all.
(646) 292-8310LATEST NEWS
Senate Tosses 'Dangerous Provision' Preventing State-Level AI Regulation From GOP Megabill
"From the start, this provision had Big Tech's money and lobbyists all over it. This is a major victory for the American people over the AI industry," said one advocate.
Jul 01, 2025
With a 99-1 vote early Tuesday, the Republican-controlled Senate decided to remove a controversial provision that would have prevented state-level regulation on artificial intelligence for 10 years from U.S. President Donald Trump's massive tax and spending bill that is currently being debated in Congress.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) was the lone lawmaker who voted to keep the moratorium in the bill.
While far from the only controversial part of the reconciliation package, the provision drew opposition from an ideologically diverse group that included Democratic and Republican state attorneys general; over 140 groups working to support children's online safety, consumer protections, and responsible innovation; and faith leaders.
Senators struck Sen. Ted Cruz's (R-Texas) AI measure from the megabill by adopting an amendment introduced by Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.). They voted on Blackburn's amendment during a session known as a vote-a-rama. Blackburn introduced the amendment after considering an agreement that would have watered down the provision.
According to The Verge, the measure that was rejected on Tuesday required states to avoid regulation AI and "automated decision systems" if they wanted to get funding for their broadband programs.
The provision would have been a major win for Big Tech, which has made the case that state laws around AI are obstructing their ability to do business.
Advocates and Democratic lawmakers cheered the decision to strip the provision.
"From the start, this provision had Big Tech's money and lobbyists all over it. This is a major victory for the American people over the AI industry. It shows that Americans are aware of the proliferation of AI harms in real time," said J.B. Branch, Big Tech accountability advocate at the watchdog group Public Citizen.
Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) said Tuesday that "early this morning, the Senate overwhelmingly voted to reject a dangerous provision to block states from regulating artificial intelligence, including protecting kids online. This 99-1 vote sent a clear message that Congress will not sell out our kids and local communities in order to pad the pockets of Big Tech billionaires."
In addition to concerns focused on Big Tech, experts recently told The Guardian that in the absence of state-level AI regulation, untrammeled growth of AI would take a toll on the world's "dangerously overheating climate."
Sacha Haworth, the executive director of the Tech Oversight Project, credited the "massive" defeat of Cruz's provision to the "incredible mobilizing by advocates to beat back Big Tech lobbying and last-minute bullying."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Critics Shred JD Vance as He Shrugs Off Millions of Americans Losing Medicaid as 'Minutiae'
"What happened to you J.D. Vance—author of Hillbilly Elegy—now shrugging off Medicaid cuts that will close rural hospitals and kick millions off healthcare as 'minutiae?'" asked Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).
Jul 01, 2025
Vice President J.D. Vance took heat from critics this week when he downplayed legislation that would result in millions of Americans losing Medicaid coverage as mere "minutiae."
Writing on X, Vance defended the budget megabill that's currently being pushed through the United States Senate by arguing that it will massively increase funding to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which he deemed to be a necessary component of carrying out the Trump administration's mass deportation operation.
"The thing that will bankrupt this country more than any other policy is flooding the country with illegal immigration and then giving those migrants generous benefits," wrote Vance. "The [One Big Beautiful Bill] fixes this problem. And therefore it must pass."
He then added that "everything else—the CBO score, the proper baseline, the minutiae of the Medicaid policy—is immaterial compared to the ICE money and immigration enforcement provisions."
It was this line that drew the ire of many critics, as the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the Senate version of the budget bill would slash spending on Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program by more than $1 trillion over a ten-year-period, which would result in more than 10 million people losing their coverage. Additionally, Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) has proposed an amendment that would roll back the expansion of Medicaid under the 2010 Affordable Care Act, which would likely kick millions more off of the program.
Many congressional Democrats were quick to pounce on Vance for what they said were callous comments about a vital government program.
"So if the only thing that matters is immigration... why didn't you support the bipartisan Lankford-Murphy bill that tackled immigration far better than your Ugly Bill?" asked Rep. Daniel Goldman (D-N.Y.). "And it didn't have 'minutiae' that will kick 12m+ Americans off healthcare or raise the debt by $4tn."
"What happened to you J.D. Vance—author of Hillbilly Elegy—now shrugging off Medicaid cuts that will close rural hospitals and kick millions off healthcare as 'minutiae?'" asked Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).
Veteran healthcare reporter Jonathan Cohn put some numbers behind the policies that are being minimized by the vice president.
"11.8M projected to lose health insurance," he wrote. "Clinics and hospitals taking a hit, especially in rural areas. Low-income seniors facing higher costs. 'Minutiae.'"
Activist Leah Greenberg, the co-chair of progressive organizing group Indivisible, zeroed in on Vance's emphasis on ramping up ICE's funding as particularly problematic.
"They are just coming right out and saying they want an exponential increase in $$$ so they can build their own personal Gestapo," she warned.
Washington Post global affairs columnist Ishaan Tharoor also found himself disturbed by the sheer size of the funding increase for ICE that Vance is demanding and he observed that "nothing matters more apparently than giving ICE a bigger budget than the militaries of virtually every European country."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Heinrich Should Be Ashamed': Lone Senate Dem Helps GOP Deliver Big Pharma Win
The provision, part of the Senate budget bill, was described as "a blatant giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry that would keep drug prices high for patients while draining $5 billion in taxpayer dollars."
Jul 01, 2025
The deep-pocketed and powerful pharmaceutical industry notched a significant victory on Monday when the Senate parliamentarian ruled that a bill described by critics as a handout to drug corporations can be included in the Republican reconciliation package, which could become law as soon as this week.
The legislation, titled the Optimizing Research Progress Hope and New (ORPHAN) Cures Act, would exempt drugs that treat more than one rare disease from Medicare's drug-price negotiation program, allowing pharmaceutical companies to charge exorbitant prices for life-saving medications in a purported effort to encourage innovation. (Medications developed to treat rare diseases are known as "orphan drugs.")
The consumer advocacy group Public Citizen observed that if the legislation were already in effect, Medicare "would have been barred from negotiating lower prices for important treatments like cancer drugs Imbruvica, Calquence, and Pomalyst."
Among the bill's leading supporters is Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), whose spokesperson announced the parliamentarian's decision to allow the measure in the reconciliation package after previously advising that it be excluded. Heinrich is listed as the legislation's only co-sponsor in the Senate, alongside lead sponsor Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.).
"Sen. Heinrich should be ashamed of prioritizing drug corporation profits over lower medicine prices for seniors and people with disabilities," Steve Knievel, access to medicines advocate at Public Citizen, said in a statement Monday. "Patients and consumers breathed a sigh of relief when the Senate parliamentarian stripped the proposal from Republicans' Big Ugly Betrayal, so it comes as a gut punch to hear that Sen. Heinrich welcomed the reversal and continued to champion a proposal that will transfer billions from taxpayers to Big Pharma."
"People across the country are demanding lower drug prices and for Medicare drug price negotiations to be expanded, not restricted," Knievel added. "Sen. Heinrich should apologize to his constituents and start listening to them instead of drug corporation lobbyists."
The Biotechnology Innovation Organization, a lobbying group whose members include pharmaceutical companies, has publicly endorsed and promoted the legislation, urging lawmakers to pass it "as soon as possible."
"This is a blatant giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry that would keep drug prices high for patients."
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the ORPHAN Cures Act would cost U.S. taxpayers around $5 billion over the next decade.
Merith Basey, executive director of Patients For Affordable Drugs Now, said that "patients are infuriated to see the Senate cave to Big Pharma by reviving the ORPHAN Cures Act at the eleventh hour."
"This is a blatant giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry that would keep drug prices high for patients while draining $5 billion in taxpayer dollars," said Basey. "We call on lawmakers to remove this unnecessary provision immediately and stand with an overwhelming majority of Americans who want the Medicare Negotiation program to go further. Medicare negotiation will deliver huge savings for seniors and taxpayers; this bill would undermine that progress."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular