The election chaos act of 2005: Hillary Clinton wants to ditch the rules

'WE have spent a lot of time and American lives and money to secure the right to vote in Afghanistan and Iraq," Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton told reporters on February 17. "We have to do everything we can to ensure that all voters have a reasonable opportunity to register and cast their vote, without becoming the victims of deceptive practices, fear, or intimidation."

That might sound like an entirely reasonable sentiment, except that Mrs. Clinton did not, in fact, utter those two sentences consecutively. Although she briefly recognized that democracy is on the move around the world, her expression of concern about deceptive practices, fear, and intimidation came at another point in her remarks. And she wasn't talking about obstacles to voting in Afghanistan or Iraq. She was talking about the United States.

Senator Clinton's speech came as she introduced--along with fellow Democratic senators John Kerry and Barbara Boxer--legislation called the "Count Every Vote Act of 2005." The bill might best be characterized as the ultimate wish-list of Democrats who believe that rumored voting irregularities in Ohio cost the party the White House in 2004. Although its stated purpose is to "count every vote," its actual effect would be to make it impossible for polling-place officials to determine which votes should be counted and which should not.

Take, for example, a provision requiring states to allow anyone to register to vote on Election Day itself, and then vote, and then "have that vote counted in the same manner as a vote cast by an eligible voter who properly registered during the regular registration period." That would give state officials virtually no time to determine whether an applicant was in fact eligible to vote.

Then there is the provision requiring states to "accept and process a voter registration application for an election for federal office unless there is a material omission or information that specifically affects the eligibility of a voter." The bill specifies that an applicant's failure to provide a Social Security number, a driver's-license number, or any proof of citizenship may not be considered a "material omission," that is, may not be used to judge whether the applicant is eligible to vote. In fact, it is not clear what--other than, say, not knowing one's own name--would constitute a "material omission" under the Clinton standard. In any event, a person who is not registered, who is not a citizen, and who has no identification would be able to show up at a polling place and register and vote.

Another feature liable to abuse is the provision requiring states to allow anyone to cast a provisional ballot anywhere in the state, regardless of where that person may--or may not--be registered to vote. That could allow someone who is not registered to cast provisional ballots at as many poll locations around the state as he could physically visit in a day.

The bill also contains a provision requiring states to allow felons to vote, once they are out of jail and off parole. What Senator Clinton calls "civic participation by ex-offenders" equates the denial of voting rights to felons with the historic denial of voting rights to people on the basis of race and sex. The bill would also require states to enact a sort of felons-outreach program, ordering that each state "shall notify any qualified ex-offender who resides in the state that such qualified ex-offender has the right to vote in an election for federal office."

Beyond the issue of voter eligibility, the bill would also create a federal mandate for the length of lines at polling places. It would require the federal Election Assistance Commission--a body created after the 2000 Florida recount controversy--to issue standards on waiting time permissible for every polling place in a state to ensure "an equal waiting time for all voters in the state." To accomplish that, the bill orders the commission to undertake a study and come up with a formula for line length based on "the voting age population; voter turnout in past elections; the number of voters registered; the number of voters who have registered since the most recent federal election; Census data for the population served by such voting site; the educational levels and socio-economic factors of the population served by such voting site; the needs and numbers of disabled voters and voters with limited English proficiency; [and] the type of voting systems used."

The bill also--in an apparent nod to all those Internet conspiracy buffs who believe that the Diebold Corporation tipped the election to George W. Bush--would make it illegal for a chief executive officer, chief financial officer, chief operating officer, or president of any company that manufactures voting equipment to take part in political activities.

Finally, in what Senator Clinton calls one of the bill's most important provisions, the legislation would require that voting machines produce an "individual voter-verifiable paper record" of each vote.