|
Original Source: http://www.aclu-sc.org/News/Releases/2001/100169/
ACLU Files Suit Challenging California's Voting System
Challenge to Flawed System Relies On Supreme Court's Interpretation
of Fourteenth Amendment in Bush v. Gore
Apr. 17, 2001
LOS ANGELES - The ACLU affiliates
of Southern California, Northern California, and San Diego joined
forces today on behalf of the AFL-CIO, the Southern Christian Leadership
Conference, the Southwest Voter Registration and Education Project,
Common Cause, and the Chicano Federation of San Diego County to
challenge California's flawed and discriminatory voting system.
The suit was filed in federal court and alleges that California's
hodgepodge of voting systems creates unacceptably discriminatory
results in violation of the U.S. Constitution and that its lack
of legally binding standards for recounts aggravates these unconstitutional
disparities. The suit focuses on the disparities between counties
using the now-notorious pre-scored punch card voting systems and
those using other, more reliable systems.
The law firms Munger, Tolles &
Olson and Altshuler, Berzon, Nussbaum, Rubin & Demain, along
with University of Michigan Law Professor Evan Caminker, join the
ACLU as co-counsel in the case.
"Our democracy has been left
hanging by a chad," said Dan Tokaji, staff attorney at the
ACLU of Southern California. "Under our Constitution, every
vote should be counted, regardless of where a person lives or the
color of his or her skin. Unfortunately, that is not true in California
today, thanks to outdated equipment which is the voting equivalent
of a horse and buggy. Unless the State takes action, California
could become the next Florida."
"In California, every vote doesn't
count, especially the votes of African American, Latino, and Asian
American voters," said Mark Rosenbaum, Legal Director of the
ACLU of Southern California. "The punch-card voting machines
used in counties like Los Angeles, San Diego, and Alameda belong
in junkyards, not voting booths. Votes are cast – then cast
away. For nearly 8 "million California voters in counties using
punch-card machines, there is a 2 &Mac189; times better chance
of having their preferences recorded on a Lotto card than on an
election ballot. This case is Bush v. Gore gone west. California
has more in common with Florida than citrus trusts and theme parks
– it has voting machines that mock our democracy."
At the time of the November 2000
election, 8.4 million people were registered to vote in counties
that used pre-scored punch card technology; over 5.9 million people
– 53.4% of voters statewide – actually voted in the
November election using a pre-scored punch card system, and over
132,000 of those votes were not counted or were counted inaccurately.
Pre-scored punch card machines produce disproportionately high rates
of two types of errors: undervoting and overvoting. In overvoting
, the machine reads more than one vote, thus disqualifying the vote;
in undervoting, the machine fails to read any vote. The combined
undervote and overvote, or error rate, averaged 2.23% for counties
using pre-scored punch card machines – more than twice the
error rate for any other type of machine or system used in other
California counties, and nearly four times the error rate of Riverside
County's touch-screen voting machines. The error rate in Los Angeles
County was 2.7%, or four and a half times the rate for Riverside,
at .59%. The number of overvotes and undervotes in Los Angeles county
alone – 72,000 – is greater than the entire number of
registered voters in 26 California counties.
Nine California counties use one
of two punch card systems, the Votomatic, widely used in Florida,
and the Pollstar. African American and Latino voters are much more
likely to reside in one of the pre-scored-punch-card-using counties.
According to one recent study, only 58.3% of white voters resided
in counties using the substandard punch card systems, whereas 80.8%
of African American voters and 66.6% of Latino voters reside in
those counties.
"From the time it was founded
in 1957 through today, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference
has fought for full equality for African Americans and others,"
said Rev. Norman Johnson, Interim Executive Director of SCLC of
Los Angeles. "Equality at the ballot box is the foundation
of freedom, the precondition for participating fully in the political
life of this nation. Today in California the vote of a person of
color is more likely to be overlooked, misread, or discarded than
a white person's, and that is simply unacceptable."
"The Southwest Voter Registration
Education Project rests its work on the premise that voting is the
key to participating fully in our nation's civic life," said
Antonio Gonzalez, President of the Southwest Voter Registration
Education Project, "and that premise, in turn, rests on the
fundamental principle of democracy: that each vote is equal and
that no vote is valued less than any other. We tell our community,
'Su voto es su voz,' or 'Your vote is your voice.' But California,
by relying on an inadequate system, blocks out the legitimate voices
of thousands of voters, voters who have taken the trouble to fulfill
their civic duties."
"In any election, but particularly
one with a presidential election that saw a razor-thin margin of
victory, it is unacceptable for even one citizen's vote to be disregarded
by accidents of residence and the machinery used in one's voting
jurisdiction," said Scott Harshbarger, President and CEO of
Common Cause. "The injury in this case is compounded by the
fact that it disproportionately harmed the same Americans –
people of color – who have fought so hard throughout history
to knock down the many barriers to the ballot box that they have
faced."
Today's lawsuit in California is
the fourth such suit that the ACLU or its affiliates have filed
since the November 2000 election; the organization filed suits in
Florida, Georgia, and Illinois earlier this year. In all four cases,
the ACLU targets the discrepancies created by the use of the pre-scored
punch card system in some areas and better systems in other areas.
The ACLU's Dan Tokaji noted that
the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment in
Bush v. Gore paved the way for these challenges.
"We should take the Supreme
Court at its word," said Tokaji. "In Bush v. Gore, it
ruled that without uniformity in recounts, some voters are disenfranchised
and denied equal protection under the law. Our case relies on the
same principle."
|