U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

26–272 2006

HEARING ON THE CONDUCT OF ELECTIONS AND

PROPOSALS FOR REFORM 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE 

ADMINISTRATION 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

HEARING HELD IN MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN, OCTOBER 24, 2005 

( 

Printed for the Use of the Committee on House Administration 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with HEARING
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION 

BOB NEY, Ohio, Chairman 

VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida 

CANDICE MILLER, Michigan 

JOHN T. DOOLITTLE, California 

THOMAS M. REYNOLDS, New York 

JUANITA MILLENDER-MCDONALD, 

California 

Ranking Minority Member 

ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

PROFESSIONAL STAFF

PAUL VINOVICH, Staff Director 

GEORGE SHEVLIN, Minority Staff Director 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with HEARING
(1) 

WISCONSIN: CONDUCT OF ELECTIONS AND 

PROPOSALS FOR REFORM 

MONDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2005 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION, Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 9 a.m., in the Milwaukee 

Federal Building and Courthouse, 517 East Wisconsin Avenue, 

Room 225, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Hon. Robert W. Ney [chairman 

of the committee] Presiding. 

Present: Representatives Ney, Ehlers, and Moore. 

Also Present: Representative Green. 

Staff Present: For Representative Ney: Paul Vinovich, Karen 

Christian, Audrey Perry, Donald Zelaya, and Patrick Sweeney. 

For Representative Ehlers: Ben Gielow. 

For Representative Millender-McDonald: George Shevlin and 

Thomas Hicks. 

For Representative Moore: Winfield A. Boerckel, Jr., Kathleen 

Mulligan-Hansel, and Shirley Ellis. 

Mr. NEY. The Committee will come to order and I would ask that 

the first panelists, we have two members for the first panel, please 

feel free to come up and join us. 

The Committee is meeting here today in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 

to take a look back at how the 2004 election was conducted in Wisconsin and hear about proposals for the reform. 

Today’s hearing follows previous hearings this Committee has 

held in both Washington, DC and in my home state of Ohio, Columbus, Ohio, on election issues. 

With the January 1, 2006, deadline for compliance with the Help 

America Vote Act, of which I was the main author along with Carson and Steny Hoyer, who authored on the Democrat side along 

with quite a lot of members to pass the Help America Vote Act 

known as HAVA, we are working with different groups from across 

the country to complete that act. The last phase of it in 2006 will 

be kicking in on January 1. 

While some in the media and others have brought a lot of attention to the 2004 election cycle in my home state of Ohio, as you 

know, Ohio was basically the most scrutinized state in the nation. 

We went there to look at some of the discussions of whether the 

Help America Vote Act worked correctly, what happened in Ohio, 

and we found some other things applied to the act and some didn’t. 

Frankly, some are local issues and state issues. 

But a lot of attention was brought in the 2004 election in my 

home state. There is substantial evidence of some voting irregularVerDate Aug 31 2005 15:14 Apr 27, 2006 Jkt 026272 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\A272P2.XXX A272P2

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
2 

ities in Wisconsin in 2004 that were brought to our attention. The 

attention given to Ohio’s problems was curious given the margin of 

victory was 10 times what it was in the state of Wisconsin. 

While some may not want to admit it, election problems are not 

limited only to the states won by Republicans. They can also occur 

in states won by Democrats. So, although Ohio is a focus, we have 

several states across the nation that we can look at and learn from. 

During the course of this hearing, we hope to learn more about 

what went wrong during the most recent election cycle and how 

elections can be improved in Wisconsin and the United States. By 

gaining a greater understanding of what happened, we will be able 

to ensure the effective administration and successful operation of 

Wisconsin elections and the United States elections in the future. 

Issues debated in Wisconsin are also being debated at the national level, and it will be particularly constructive for this Committee to learn what is happening here. 

Today we have with us members of our Committee, the House 

Administration Committee, and I would note and we will turn our 

attention to a statement by our ranking member, Juanita 

Millender-McDonald of California, and she passes her regrets today 

that she could not be here due to a commitment that she has. But 

she has a great interest in this issue as we are responding and 

working with our ranking member, Congresswoman Juanita 

Millender-McDonald. 

Also a regular member of the Committee is Congressman Vern 

Ehlers of Michigan to my right. Congressman Ehlers served on the 

Committee for the past 10 years that I have been in the House, 

and also, a member in her own right, Congresswoman Moore filling 

in our for ranking member, Juanita Millender-McDonald. Thank 

you for having us from your state. 

And also, at the far end of the table, Congressman Green, who 

had requested of me to have this hearing here in Wisconsin. We 

thank him for asking us to be here in your state and for initiating 

this hearing. 

Witnesses, I want to clarify for the record because I had a call 

from a newspaper out here, and there was a question about witnesses. At one point in time there were witnesses submitted to us 

by the minority, but then they requested witnesses, and we put the 

witnesses here so I just wanted to clarify you can’t always believe 

what you read in the newspapers. But in this case, I wanted to 

clarify that we accepted the witnesses so there are witnesses by 

both the minority and majority, which is the way it should be. 

The two witnesses contacted by us were not able to attend. The 

United States Department of Justice declined our invitation citing 

ongoing investigations into the joint task force report, and also 

Janice Mueller of the Legislative Audit Bureau was invited, but respectfully declined. But we’ll have other people who can testify 

again for results and views of the election. 

And again, with Congressman Green, we welcome him and thank 

him for having us here in your state, in your great state. This 

again is not the first of the hearings we have had and I predict it 

won’t be the last. 

Our door is always open in Washington. Behind us are staff of 

House Administration, majority, minority. We are always willing as 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
3 

we work through HAVA and other bills to listen to the concerns 

across the United States and input on elections on how people 

think that it can be made better. 

Full press makes it easier to vote and harder to cheat. Everybody 

can agree on that. 

Each hearing that we have helps to advance our understanding 

of what problems exist in our election system and how best to solve 

them. I look forward to hearing from all the witnesses, and I will 

yield to Congresswoman Moore who is here on behalf of our ranking member. 

Before I do, just a technical piece of business, I would like to advise people in the audience today that cellular phones, pagers, and 

other electronic equipment should be silenced from interrupting the 

proceedings. 

Also, we welcome you in the audience that are here today. This 

will be an official meeting of the Congressional Committee of the 

U.S. House of Representatives House Administration Committee, 

and so it is governed today by the rules of House of Representatives, and these rules give the Committee Chair the power to maintain order and decorum. 

Pursuant to that, disruptive people in the audience who interfere 

with the conduct of the Committee’s business will be removed. We 

ask that you not either boo or applaud depending on the mood that 

betakes you if someone says something. 

I don’t know if I have the same type of control of members as 

I do the audience. And with that, without objection I would ask 

that both members who are not members of this Committee, Congresswoman Moore and Congressman Green without objection be 

allowed to participate as full members. 

Ms. MOORE. I absolutely want to thank Chairman Ney and appreciate his courtesy for allowing me to sit with these distinguished 

members of the House Administration Committee. As you well 

know, you were one of the first members of congress that I had the 

opportunity to meet when I was elected to Congress and the House 

Administration Committee continues to be a committee that really 

deals with matters and mostly bipartisan manner, and I am happy 

to welcome you here to Wisconsin, great place and a great lake. 

I—I am going to ask Mr. Chairman that we submit Ranking 

Member Juanita Millender-McDonald Congresswoman’s opening 

statement for the record. I will read just a small portion of it. 

Mr. NEY. Without objection. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. JUANITA MILLENDER-McDONALD, A 

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS READ BY CONGRESSWOMAN GWEN MOORE 

Ms. MOORE. Thank you. I would like to—this is Ranking Member 

Millender McDonald’s opening statement in part. I would like to 

thank the Chairman for holding this field hearing in Milwaukee, 

Wisconsin. However due to a prior commitment which cannot be rescheduled, I am unable to attend today’s hearing. I hope we’ll continue to hear dialogue on how the conduct of elections and review 

how the Help America Vote Act, HAVA, is being implemented. 

Today the committee will hear testimony on the conduct of elections in Wisconsin and proposals for reform. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
4 

And without objection, I would like to submit her testimony for 

the record. 

Mr. NEY. Without objection. 

[The statement of Ms. Millender-McDonald follows:] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
5 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 9 26272A.001
6 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 10 26272A.002
7 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. GWEN MOORE, A REPRESENTATIVE 

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN 

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to take this opportunity 

to read my own opening statements, and I want to thank you again 

for that privilege. Being a freshman I never expected to be in the 

position of the Ranking Member, but you know, just can’t hold a 

good woman down. 

Mr. NEY. Ranking Member from California wanted me to tell you 

just don’t get too comfortable. 

Ms. MOORE. That feels good. Since the 2004 elections, a number 

of task forces and special committees here in my state have reviewed how the election was conducted around the state and in 

Milwaukee. 

These bodies included the legislative counsel special committee 

on election law review which included county clerks, representative 

of Milwaukee County election commission, municipal clerks, election lawyers, and the executive director of our state election board, 

Mr. Kevin Kennedy, who will be testifying here today as well. 

Again, we had the City of Milwaukee election task force which 

looked closely at the conduct of the elections here in Milwaukee, 

the chair of which Ms. Sharon Robinson who is also in the audience 

and will testify this morning, and as you have mentioned Chairman Ney, the legislative audit bureau evaluation of voter registration issued this September, a very credible nonpartisan body in our 

state. 

Each of these bodies found what they believed to be the problems 

that needed to be solved; mainly administrative errors by poll 

workers and rules that need updating. 

So they have made a host of recommendations which include better training of poll workers, recommended changes to our current 

state elections procedures, rules and systems and perhaps most importantly the request for better funding for state and local elections. Agencies without—which the first two recommendations will 

never take place, the old mandate sort of argument, Mr. Chairman. 

You will find this call echoed in the written testimony of many 

of our witnesses here today, I would submit on both sides. After 

looking closely at what happened here in our state, none of these 

state’s local bodies recommended that every voter without a government issued photo ID be turned away at the polls. Perhaps this 

is because such a proposal would not solve the difficulties we faced 

last November 2nd. 

It seems to be a solution in search of a problem. And it has the 

potential to disenfranchise the thousands of people, the elderly, 

ethnic minority, and students. 

Just to illustrate, I would like to submit for the record, Mr. 

Chairman, a study by Professor John Peroserat (phonetic) that outlines just how many people in this state and in Milwaukee do not 

have a driver’s licenses. 

In this state over 177,000 of seniors, an estimated 98,247 Wisconsin residents age 35 through 64, and 47 percent of county African American adults and 43 percent of Hispanic adults in Milwaukee County do not have driver’s licenses. 

Why focus on—why not focus on real solutions that solve our real 

difficulties with the elections here in Wisconsin and Milwaukee? 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
8 

Some recommendations like the statewide voter registration system 

is already in the process of being constructed as we speak, and I 

understand it may go a long way toward resolving a number of the 

discrepancies. 

Other recommendations by this body will require passage of laws 

through the state legislature. 

But then let’s go and pass the consensus recommendations made 

by these experts who have looked closely at what went wrong, and 

then fund the recommended changes adequately and then see if it 

works. 

What we should not do is jump the gun with a proposal that does 

not address the problems identified by state and local experts and 

at the cost of disenfranchising so many elderly voters. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for the courtesy, and 

I would ask my testimony as well be submitted for the record. 

Mr. NEY. Thank you for the statement. Without objection, the 

testimony and the additional materials will be submitted for the 

record. 

[The statement of Ms. Moore follows:] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
9 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 15 26272A.003
10 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 16 26272A.004
11 

Mr. NEY. Mr. Ehlers. 

Mr. EHLERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. VERNON J. EHLERS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN 

Mr. EHLERS. I am pleased to take a little hop across the lake to 

be in Milwaukee once again. I have not been here since August. 

And it is a beautiful downtown area, beautiful art museum. It is 

good to be back again. 

I was somewhat surprised for the reason for the visit because 

this has been a very well kept secret nationally that the election 

last year was as flawed as it was. All the attention focused on 

Ohio. 

And clearly if Ohio had gone the other way, all the attention 

would have focused on Wisconsin, and I think people in the state 

would have been very chagrinned to have all their faults exposed 

on national TV that occurred in Ohio and Florida five years ago. 

Clearly there is something wrong and I was surprised when reviewing the record. I have been involved in elections for 30 years, 

I have served on this committee as long as I have been in Congress, and we have had to deal with a lot of flawed elections. The 

pattern is the same in almost every case. 

What I have not heard is the word fraud, which is what everyone 

really worries about. There are, of course, the honest mistakes that 

are made by poll workers who may not be properly trained, who 

only do the job twice a year and may have forgotten the procedures. That certainly can be handled with checklists, and I was 

surprised to find that there were not sufficient written instructions 

available for poll workers. That may be part of the problem. 

But poll workers are very—in my experience, very fine people, 

very dedicated people who come out to work in these elections very 

long hours, and do a difficult job dealing with the public that sometimes gets angry about waiting in line. So I am not in any way 

criticizing the poll workers. 

But clearly some things were wrong in the last election in Wisconsin and they should be corrected. 

I simply don’t understand the argument that it is too difficult for 

individuals to get an ID card. In Michigan, we have had it for 

years. People ask for it. Simply because if they didn’t have a driver’s license, they have trouble cashing checks, they have trouble 

doing financial transactions, etcetera, and so for years in Michigan, 

we have issued at request state ID cards through the secretary of 

state’s office exactly the same process as getting the driver’s license 

except you don’t take a test and you are not qualified to drive afterwards. 

I just think that the argument that it is too difficult for people 

to do just does not hold water. And whether or not Wisconsin decides to use an ID card for election purposes is besides the point. 

There is certainly no reason not to have ID cards available furnished by the state through the secretary of state’s office. 

Michigan does it. A lot of other states do it upon request, and 

there is no difficulty. 

Some states, of course, do require the picture ID and I think it 

is a good idea. That may not have been the problem here, I don’t 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
12 

know. But certainly it helps reduce fraud in elections, and fraud is 

what you have to worry about. 

Honest mistakes will always occur. Fraud is deliberate and 

planned, and you have to take every step you can to make certain 

that fraud does not occur. There is certainly evidence of some fraud 

occurring, perhaps not enough to have overturned any election, but 

there is certainly enough evidence that we should be concerned 

about it. There has been enough so that the people of Wisconsin 

should be concerned about it. 

With that, I give back. 

Mr. NEY. Thank you. The gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Green. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. MARK GREEN, A REPRESENTATIVE 

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you for giving me the chance to testify this 

morning and thanks for coming to my home state. 

I join Representative Moore in welcoming you to Wisconsin and 

Milwaukee. 

Mr. Chairman, this area is famous for many things, we are the 

home of Harleys and beer and bratwurst and we are playing some 

pretty good basketball and baseball as well these days. 

Unfortunately we are also becoming known for election irregularities. These problems go back several election cycles breaking onto 

the national scene with the 2000 presidential election and the 

widely reported cigarettes for votes program and it carried over 

into the elections last fall. 

Out-of-date voter lists, fake names, invalid addresses, double, 

sometimes triple voting, ballots cast by convicted felons whose 

rights have not yet been legally restored. Unfortunately, the laundry list goes on and on. 

Mr. Chairman, that’s one reason why I made the request some 

months ago that you came here today and I am so grateful that you 

have. 

In May, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported an investigation that found almost 300 cases of felons voting illegally, at least 

100 cases of double voting, 1200 votes from invalid addresses, and 

thousands more ballots cast than people reported as voting. 

A mutual friend and former colleague of all of ours, Mayor Tom 

Barrett, even reported that the folks he bought his house from six 

years ago were still on the voter rolls registered at that home address. 

Of course, these cases of irregularity are by no means exclusive 

to Milwaukee or Wisconsin. We all know unfortunately that they 

plague our election system in a number of places. But even if Milwaukee or Wisconsin were the only place with problems, it would 

still potentially hurt our democracy and people’s faith in our system. 

When presidential elections come down to the outcome of one or 

two states as we have experienced for two presidential elections in 

a row, election problems don’t just affect one state, they can affect 

the entire country and the future course of our country. 

Wisconsin as you noted was very nearly the deciding state last 

fall and even four years ago. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
13 

Last year on a percentage basis, the outcome was closer in Wisconsin than any other state. Now, of course, there is no silver bullet to fixing our election problems, but there are measures that can 

make the process better, more reliable, and less subject to the 

fraud that we have seen far too often. 

Mr. Chairman, as this committee looks at ways to election challenges and restore people’s faith in our system, I would ask that 

you consider legislation I offered some months ago and introduced, 

the Vote Act. I believe it is a broadly written response to many of 

the issues that you will hear about this morning. 

The Vote Act requires training for all poll workers and establishes a federal grant program to help states meet those training 

requirements. My bill also proposes changes to the registration system, increasing accountability and setting clear standards in all 

facets of voter registration. 

During voter registration drives, my bill enhances in our system 

by prohibiting felons from canvassing voters, and requiring that 

paid canvassers disclose the source of their pay. 

The Vote Act also ensures that investigations on voting complaints happens fast because we should not have to wait for a long 

drawn out process. 

In some ways the heart of the Vote Act is a photo ID requiring 

all voters to present a valid photo ID before casting a ballot. This 

requirement is one of the principal recommendations of the bipartisan Carter-Baker Commission. 

Requiring voters to show a government approved photo ID is the 

best way for us to protect the fundamental American principle of 

one man one vote. Every American has the sacred right to cast 

their vote, but only once. You have to show an ID to rent a movie 

at your local video store. In Wisconsin you even need one to buy 

certain cold medicines. With so much at stake in our elections, I 

don’t think it is too much to require one for voting. 

I have listened carefully to concerns that a few have raised that 

some folks might have trouble paying for or obtaining an ID. The 

Vote Act specifically includes provisions to try to address those concerns. 

It authorizes, for example, states like Wisconsin to form a photo 

ID requirement for those who can’t obtain one because of a disability or a physical incapacity. 

Of course, voters are not the only folks affected by a photo ID 

requirement. Those great folks that my colleague Vern Ehlers referred to sit on the other side of the table during the election, the 

poll workers, they will be affected, and my bill makes their job 

easier because it establishes a simple rule, voters must present a 

photograph ID. 

The photograph ID requirement is by no means the answer to all 

of our election problems—not by a long shot and I think that’s 

something we can all agree on. 

For example, a key problem reported by the Milwaukee task 

force was a lack of sufficient training among poll workers. The Vote 

Act requires training for all poll workers, and again, it establishes 

a grant program that helps states meet those requirements. 

The task force also found problems with voter registration. 

20,000 registration cards were not processed in time by November. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
14 

My bill also proposes changes to the registration system, increasing 

accountability, and setting clear standards in all facets of voter registration. 

The Vote Act contains provisions, that combat these and allows 

us to go after organizations that do not follow the standards originally outlined by HAVA which, as you noted, you were the lead author of. 

If someone recognizes fraud during say, a voter registration 

drive, my bill ensures that investigations into voting complaints 

start right away. 

Every American deserves speedy and thorough investigation into 

the problems arising from any election. 

In summary, Mr. Chairman, our democracy can withstand a lot 

of things, a loss of faith in our elections is not one of them. 

We have to believe that whoever wins, Republican, Democrat, 

conservative, liberal, your guy, my guy, he or she has won fair and 

square. It is the only way that our leaders have the democratic 

mandate they need to take on our nation’s most heated challenges. 

That’s why the work of this committee is so crucial to our future. 

And I appreciate the committee’s willingness in traveling so far 

to look into the problems and all that has happened here in Wisconsin. 

If problems can arise in a state as great as Wisconsin and a community as great as Milwaukee, they can happen anywhere. 

I applaud your commitment to this issue. The American voter 

and I appreciate the chance to address this committee. It means a 

great deal to me. I yield back. 

[The statement of Mr. Green follows:] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
15 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 27 26272A.006
16 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 28 26272A.007
17 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 29 26272A.008
18 

Mr. NEY. Again, I want to thank the Gentleman once again for 

inviting us here. This is why we are here, so we appreciate it. 

We are going to go to our first panel. I want to explain, there 

are time clocks. We are all four creatures of the legislature, all four 

of us. We have all served. I was a state Representative and state 

Senator so we have all served, and in most of our legislatures, you 

don’t have to have a clock. Legislators kind of know when to wrap 

it up. 

Congress is a lot different. That way we can control things. We 

have a clock and it will go green and then it will hit yellow and 

you have a minute to sum up and then it hits red. 

We just try to stay to the clock and the timing, so I will give you 

a friendly reminder if it goes past the red. That way we can get 

all three panels in. That’s the procedure of the House. 

Again, welcome State Senator Joe Leibham and also State Representative Pedro Colon. And I want to welcome both members and 

we will start with the Senator first. 

STATEMENT OF STATE SENATOR JOE LEIBHAM 

Mr. LEIBHAM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Committee. Welcome to Wisconsin. It is a pleasure to welcome Senator Ney and 

Congressman Ehlers to Wisconsin and to welcome home two of 

Wisconsin’s favorites: Congressman Green and Congressman 

Moore. It is a pleasure to see you both. 

Congresswoman Moore, I have not had a chance to visit with you 

since our departure Senate, but it is good to see you before us 

today. 

Mr. Chairman and committee members, one key block in foundation of our free country, our democracy here in America is our election process and the ability of our citizens to make a difference by 

casting a vote for our elected officials. 

Unfortunately, I believe and I believe it is being that this foundation has been softened if not eroded specifically over the recent 

years due to legitimate concerns regarding human administrative 

error and fraudulent voter activity here in Wisconsin. 

Each year we have witnessed increasing problems and with the 

process here in Wisconsin while the faith of our voters continues 

to erode. As Congressman Green indicated, we have had problems 

in the 2000 elections, 2002 elections, and most concerningly in the 

most recent 2004 election we have had a strong concern of questionable voter activity and administrative error. 

Recently the legislature put together a special committee, a joint 

legislative council committee that has been working to review the 

problems of the 2004 election, and that committee has been working in concert with some official investigations that are taking 

place here in the state of Wisconsin. 

We have the joint election fraud task force which is of the U.S. 

Attorney, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Milwaukee District Attorney, and the Milwaukee Police Department. That task 

force has been reviewing some of the problems of our 2004 election 

here in Wisconsin, and they have recently released some preliminary finding that show some very concerning things. 

Today the preliminary findings of that task force show that we 

have more than 100 individual instances of suspected double voting 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
19 

in the 2004 election, people voting in names of persons who mostly 

likely did not vote or voting in names of individuals that would be 

fake. 

We have more than 200 felons who voted when they were not eligible to do so. We have evidence of paid special deputy registrars 

who falsely listed approximately 65 names in order to receive compensation for those registrations, and to date, the number of votes 

counted in the City of Milwaukee exceeds the numbers of persons 

voting by more than 4500 individuals. 

To date, 14 people have been charged in connection with the 

overall investigation including 10 felons who have been suspected 

of voting illegally while still on probation or parole. 

Now, while the majority of the media coverage here in Wisconsin 

has been focused on the City of Milwaukee, our special committee 

wanted to take a look at what is happening across the state, we 

believe activity and administrative errors can take place in any location, so we asked the legislative audit bureau to conduct an audit 

of all of our election municipalities across the state of Wisconsin. 

Recently, as Congresswoman Moore indicated, that legislative 

audit bureau report was brought forward and they indicated a 

number of concerning problems as well. 

Specifically, the audit found that 98 ineligible felons may have 

voted in our 2004 election, two individuals who possibly voted 

twice, one voter who may have voted under age, and four absentee 

ballots that should not have been counted because the voters who 

cast them had passed away prior to election day. 

And these—this audit bureau information has brought forward, 

obviously, a number of areas of administrative functioning that 

could be changed in our election processes as well. 

But clearly these problems demonstrate, there needs to be some 

corrections in Wisconsin’s election laws and our committee has 

sought about to do just that. 

Within the next couple of weeks, people can move a comprehensive package of election reform. That is going to do a number of 

things to reform our election processes. 

We worked with the City of Milwaukee, we worked with governor’s administration, and we hope to bring forward a number of 

changes which would again not only administratively improve our 

election laws, but also deal with the potential of fraudulent activity. 

In addition to this comprehensive reform package, the legislature 

has been working on a photo ID requirement. I have joined Representative Jeff Stone in authoring a photo ID requirement here in 

the State of Wisconsin. That photo ID requirement does provide 

flexibility for individuals who do reside in nursing home facilities 

and assisted living facilities and would provide a measure which 

would cover costs for anybody who is unable to afford a photo ID. 

Unfortunately, that legislation has been vetoed by our governor 

three times, but we do plan to continue to move forward to focus 

on photo ID through legislative and a possible constitutional 

amendment. 

I would encourage the committee members to work with us as we 

explore our election processes here in the State of Wisconsin. We 

want to fix our elections. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
20 

I would encourage you to endorse Congressman Green’s Vote Act. 

It includes many provisions that we have looked at and plan to 

move forward here in the state of Wisconsin. And again, collectively, we need to accomplish our goal which is to ensure that that 

key foundation of our country, our democracy, the right to vote is 

maintained and enhanced here in Wisconsin. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Committee Members. 

Mr. NEY. Thank you, Senator. Representative. 

[The statement of Mr. Leibham follows:] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
21 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 36 26272A.009
22 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 37 26272A.010
23 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 38 26272A.011
24 

STATEMENT OF STATE REPRESENTATIVE PEDRO COLON 

Mr. COLON. Good morning. Thank you, Ms. Moore, Mr. Ehlers 

and Mr. Green for allowing me to testify and giving me opportunity 

to express my views on the issue requiring citizens to present photo 

identification for voting. 

As a person who runs for office and dedicates a great amount of 

time to influencing issues and elections, I am interested and committed to a fair election process for all. 

However, it has been my experience and understanding voter 

identification requirements will undermine the participation in the 

electoral system of local and statewide elections and ultimately 

lead to a government that is less representative and less legitimate 

in the eyes of the public at large. 

The election results in 2000 differed by about 11,000 votes. The 

election 2004, those election results differed by about 5,000 votes. 

Given what happened in Ohio and what happened in 2000 in 

Florida and in Wisconsin, given the fact that the electorate was 

definitely unsure as to who should govern as most of the nation, 

it was greatly contested. 

The local newspaper in the Milwaukee metro area, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, suspecting that Wisconsin would become 

another Florida, covered the election process in the 2004 elections 

and concluded that various procedures and process were not followed and that voter lists were woefully disorganized and poorly 

kept. 

This report did not cover the outlying areas of Milwaukee or the 

outlying suburbs. 

This in turn led to a partisan call and suspicion of voter fraud 

in the Milwaukee election. Based on those partisan calls for investigations, the local district attorney, the U.S. Attorney’s office, the 

Milwaukee police department, conducted an investigation. 

So far as of August 22nd they have not been able to find any 

fraud in the allegations by essentially the Republican party’s call 

for an investigation into the fraud. 

Of the total 105 cases found by the legislative audit bureau to 

have constituted fraud, 98 were felons who were not allowed to 

vote. 

We all understand that those felons should not vote or should not 

participate, but I don’t know that a voter ID requirement is going 

to dissuade or in any way, shape, or reform not allow those felons 

to not vote in the future elections. 

According to Assistant U.S. Attorney Biskupic, there is still no 

evidence of widespread conspiracy, end of quote. As of found assorted clerical errors, other inconsistencies, but no fraud. 

At the same time the three investigative agencies have found no 

widespread fraud in our elections, the University of Milwaukee employment training institute has found 177,399 persons over the age 

of 65 and 98,247 of the ages between 35 and 65 simply do not possess a driver’s license. Not surprisingly, disproportionately it is the 

elderly and the poor that do not have the driver’s license. 

In my zip code of the area in which I represent 58 percent of the 

males do not have a driver’s license and 36 percent of the females 

simply do not have a driver’s license. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
25 

The same study found that 3 percent of students residing in the 

dormitories at the University of Wisconsin Milwaukee campus and 

Marquette University, only 3 percent were properly changing their 

addresses on their driver’s licenses. 

I also believe that a photograph identification would simply frustrate the course of the voting. In the Town of Caledonia not long 

ago a clerk decided she was going to get a jump start on all the 

lists that we talked about, and in the process of that during an 

education referendum in that town, the people became so frustrated at the requirement that they simply went home and midmorning during that referendum it was reported that she just simply stopped requiring the IDs. It was too cumbersome. 

Given the fact that there has been no widespread fraud according 

to the Attorney General, U.S. Attorney General, and given the fact 

that the people do not possess a driver’s license, I don’t know requiring a ID is the best way to maintain democracy and participation in the election process. 

I do understand that there have been problems. However, voter 

ID will not do anything to solve those problems. 

Just this past April, Governor Doyle proposed voter reforms that 

will address bureaucratic errors and called into question the integrity of our election system. This reform include a early voting option for all eligible voters, a mandatory training for poll workers, 

uniform voter registration cards requiring municipalities to develop 

an election day plan designed to meet 30 minute maximum waiting 

time at the polls, allow state wide uniform poll hours, and require 

maps of the polling sites for voters. 

It is my belief that we should be focussing on these types of reforms rather than creating more barriers for one to cast a vote on 

election day. 

Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to testify. 

[The statement of Mr. Colon follows:] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
26 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 43 26272A.012
27 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 44 26272A.013
28 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 45 26272A.014
29 

Mr. NEY. I want to thank both members of the legislature for 

their testimony. I have a few questions and we will turn to my colleagues. 

In the Help America Vote Act we had a provision for first time 

registrants, that they could use an ID, the last four digits of their 

social security number, a bank card, a bank statement, or something else with their name on it. 

The Congress at that time didn’t tackle the ID issue it didn’t say; 

this is the ID you have to have. We started to go down that path, 

and decided to deal with it on a generic basis—so in federal elections, for the first time registrants, there is some ID requirement. 

Then there was the attestation that you have to be a citizen of 

the United States to vote, and that non-citizens who voted could be 

charged. So, some of this was left up to the states. 

There is still—and somebody will be testifying from the CarterBaker Commission today—talk in Washington of voter ID and, the 

verified paper trail. My state has a paper trail requirement. I am 

always asked about whether we should mandate that nationally. 

So there are still questions ahead. We are looking at Georgia and 

their voter ID requirements. 

Do you have any comments—as we look at Georgia’s law and 

what happened down there, part of it was struck down, Senator 

and also Representative, Congressman, since you authored the law 

that was vetoed several times, is there a difference between the 

way you approached it and Georgia approached it. 

The argument in Georgia was that you had to provide a piece of 

paper and tell why you could not pay for an ID, and another reason 

why it was struck down in Georgia with the voter ID was because 

of lack of locations and access. 

Any comments in the difference between the law here that was 

voted on and in Georgia. 

Mr. LEIBHAM. Thank you. I will begin with the response. Under 

the provision that Wisconsin’s legislature is continuing to review 

the three types of identification that we would require individuals 

to show prior to voting in Wisconsin election would be a state 

issued photo ID, state issued driver’s license which has a photo ID 

on it, or a military ID. 

And we have written the legislation to ensure that there are a 

number of exceptions or provisions in place for individuals that 

may not be able to obtain. Specifically in the area of seniors we 

have an exception in the legislation that says if you reside in a 

nursing facility and an assisted living facility or you are infirmed 

in your own home due to a disability or inability to get to a polling 

location, you would being exempt from a photo ID requirement. 

In addition, under the Wisconsin legislation, we adopt the provisional voting concept that is at the federal level and that would say 

if you come in to a Wisconsin election on election day and for one 

reason or another didn’t obtain or have the identification that was 

required, you could cast a provisional ballot and have until 4:00 

o’clock the following day to come in and provide the appropriate 

identification. 

I think that is one major difference in the Georgia law, in allowing that provisional balloting to take place just in case a person 

does forget the ID on election day. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
30 

Mr. NEY. Representative Colon. 

Mr. COLON. My only comment would be that talking about a 

voter ID reform assumes that there is voter fraud. I don’t think 

that has been found anywhere. 

I truly believe that in this community in the City of Milwaukee 

we have a good U.S. Attorney general, we have a pretty good D.A. 

that does a good job and there are good investigative agencies. 

There simply does not exist any widespread voter fraud. Those are 

their words, not mine. 

The fact is that Wisconsin has a very progressive tradition of allowing and including people to vote. In the last election, we had 75 

percent of the eligible voter voted. 

My view is simply that we can work on the polling sites, we can 

work on some of the things that we need to work on and we all 

understand that. I think that is a bipartisan understanding. 

But requiring an ID will disproportionally affect the people that 

simply have the least. 

I don’t believe that we should make requirements that simply we 

will leave a large proportion of the electorate, of the eligible electorate to be essentially political refugees during an election. 

Mr. NEY. Any comments on the Help America Vote Act? First 

time registrants by mail will have to put their last four digits of 

social security, that would be under the federal provision. Any 

thoughts on that or—not a photo ID, but it is——

Mr. COLON. That proposal has been being reviewed obviously at 

the state level, we discussed that. The question in regard to the social security requirement is basically the law says that an individual could put down four numbers supposedly supposed to be a 

social security number and then sign an affidavit that supposed to 

be suggesting that you are who you say you are, and again, if an 

individual is wanting to participate in fraudulent activity, those 

aren’t two hurdles that are hard to overcome and that’s the concern 

that Wisconsin has with the social security requirement. 

I should add, Mr. Chairman, that Wisconsin has probably some 

of the most open election laws in the United States of America in 

regard to the ability for any individual to come in and vote until 

8:00 p.m. On election day. We have same day recommendation. We 

have provisional balloting opportunities. 

And what we are trying to do in the legislative approach and I 

appreciate your efforts as well maintain the openness while ensuring that that openness is not being taken advantage of. And to do 

that, you have to have checks and balances in place so that you can 

ensure that the voting process, the very open voting process is not 

being taken advantage of. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. NEY. As I am sure the members of the audience are aware, 

when we passed the Help America Vote act, provisional balloting 

was a key issue. That way, if you have any disputes in states about 

the ID requirements, and someone says, ‘‘Well, this is not a proper 

ID’’—people can still vote with a provisional ballot. Provisional balloting stops the disenfranchisement of individuals. We had conversation in Ohio about the intention of provisional balloting. 

I think the provisional balloting is a large key to HAVA. As 

states go down the voter ID or identification path, people could still 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
31 

use the provisional ballot if they are disputed at the polling place, 

they can still vote and have their ballot decided later. 

Do you have any questions? 

Ms. MOORE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank this panel for 

their very, very astute testimony. I think I would like to question 

Representative Colon first. 

Am I going to have five minutes for both witnesses or just one. 

Mr. NEY. Both. 

Ms. MOORE. Both of them together. 

Mr. NEY. Yes. 

Ms. MOORE. Start the clock over again, okay. 

I am going to have questions for both of you and you know that 

I am not that good on not talking long, you know that. 

Mr. LEIBHAM. We miss you. 

Ms. MOORE. Here is the question. This Commission I believe that 

you served on, Senator Leibham, came with some excellent recommendations for reforming the elections process, and I guess I 

just really don’t get it. 

I can’t connect the dots between how requiring a photograph ID 

would stop some of the mistakes, errors, even the 98 felons that 

have been investigated, I believe one of those people have been convicted. 

And I am wondering about—and while protecting the vote is extremely important, I am wondering how you are reacting to the 

John Peroserat study that we entered into the record and I believe 

that Representative Colon referred to. 

You talk about the one voter that may have been under age in 

your testimony, the four dead people who didn’t die on purpose I 

am sure, but they cast their ballots before they died on election 

day. 

And I am wondering how—how requiring a photograph ID which 

will have the impact of disfranchising over a quarter of a million, 

over a quarter of a million eligible voters in the state and very 

clearly this breaks out demographically to have a great impact on 

minorities. 

You take Wisconsin white men, for example, only 17 percent of 

them don’t have a valid driver’s license versus a Hispanic man 46 

percent of whom don’t have a driver’s license, an African woman, 

49 percent of them don’t have a valid driver’s license versus 17 percent of white women. 

When you break it down by age group, you are going to find that 

this discriminates against students, younger people, white men 18 

to 24, 36 percent of them don’t have a valid driver’s license, but a 

Hispanic man, 57 percent of them don’t. 

So I am wondering when we start looking at reforming the process, two questions for both of you. 

Number 1, how will a valid driver’s license stop someone—a felon 

can get a driver’s license. How will that stop a felon from voting 

number 1, and number 2, in terms of the scale of things, how 

would stopping—what is your response to the over quarter of a million people, particularly people of color and young people and the 

elderly, the adverse impact it will have on them were we to enact 

the voter ID requirement. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
32 

Mr. COLON. I think I will be brief. I think that Wisconsin has a 

progressive tradition. The courts interpret them a vote that is cast 

has to be proven not meeting the requirements beyond a reasonable doubt. The same standard for voters who do a criminal conviction. That’s how convinced we are in the state that people should 

participate. 

Now, having said that, I think you inevitably engage in the slippery scope that first you are requiring people to show the IDs and 

then you are requiring social security number and then require the 

conviction record and then require their INS status and then you 

continue on the slippery slope where we end up in the Dominican 

Republic where a police officer can stop you and require whatever 

it is that they want from you, and if you don’t have that national 

ID, at least it was when I was a kid when I went on vacation there 

with my parents, you get thrown in jail. That is not the country 

I want to live in. 

I want to live in a state that allows me to vote and allows me 

to vote fairly, it runs fairly. 

I am happy to report that from my district in the neighborhood 

of south side, it is predominantly run by honest hard working people. That is a fact. 

Ms. MOORE. Before your time runs out, I want to ask you this 

question. There can you—can you share with us a little bit of wisdom about the folks who are unbanked. We have been constantly 

getting examples here of why can’t people have IDs. 

You need them for your bank accounts, you need them to go to 

Blockbuster Video. You need an ID to get on an airplane. 

Can you explain to us why many people in the Hispanic community are not middle class because it sounds to me like we are putting an asset test on people, people who don’t have cars. 

Can you please respond to me whether there is any relationship 

between having valid driver’s licenses and being middle class. 

Mr. COLON. Again, briefly my experience is in my district people 

have two jobs, sometimes three jobs, they live on a month-to-month 

basis to make a living. 

The economy is largely on a cash basis. You have temporary jobs 

that don’t provide any sort of economic stability. 

All of these things lead to movements from apartment to apartment to apartment, and the fact is the more requirements that you 

impose on people to cast their vote which is their right, which is 

the premise of our whole constitution and our form of government, 

I think it would be wrong to disenfranchise those people. 

I don’t believe that these people are dishonest. I don’t believe 

that the people in my district are any—have a tendency to fraudulent activity any more than any other district. 

Unfortunately, I don’t think there is a cause and effect between 

a voter ID and the fact that we would somehow diminish voter 

fraud. The fact is that we have not found voter fraud. The fact is 

that all the mistakes that have been found including felons voting, 

addresses not existing are largely due to the power structure; that 

is, the people that run the elections. 

We are the ones responsible for delivering the electoral system, 

and we have failed to do so. People have acted the most reasonable 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
33 

way they can. They have waited in lines, they have gotten to the 

tune of 75 percent of eligible voting, they are doing their job. 

I don’t understand why it is that we are requiring them to now 

overcome some burden that we have created as a people who run 

elections and actually make our living at it. 

Mr. NEY. Time has expired. 

Ms. MOORE. He is a state legislator. 

Mr. NEY. The Senator may like to answer this. 

Mr. LEIBHAM. If I may briefly, thank you Congresswoman, for 

the question. 

First, under the legislation that the state of Wisconsin is considering, we have amended recently on a bipartisan effort to deal with 

the felon issue, and specific language in the bill that Governor 

Doyle has even indicated that he would support specifically that 

would inform an individual who is in felony status that they don’t 

have the right to vote, and that’s how we are handling that situation. 

Number 2, in regard to the administrative functioning of our lesson and how it may help. I would encourage, and I am sure you 

talked as well, but talk with the poll workers. 

This past I talked with three ladies who work at polling locations 

in Sheboygan and Manitowoc, elderly women who are saying that 

photo IDs would help them to more administratively function the 

election with ease. 

When you see a name on an ID tied to a photo, it is easier to 

be able to move people through the voting process, election process. 

I have not met a poll worker at least in my district that has indicated that by asking individuals to show a photo ID, it would be 

a greater burden or challenge in the election process. 

Please remember as well that under the photo ID legislation that 

we are considering, we have no costs for a individual to receive an 

ID, so there is not an economic concern that should be legitimate. 

Ms. MOORE. Excuse me, Senator, but there is because you have 

to have a birth certificate in order to get a photo ID, and if you 

are born in Mississippi, I have done this, you have to send for it, 

you have to pay 12 bucks for the birth certificate. If you have got 

until 4:00 p.m. When you cast the provisional ballot, somehow you 

have to get the register of deeds in Mississippi to get it to you and 

Fed Ex to get there. There is a cost of having a photo ID. 

So I—I am asking you when we—we don’t want to disenfranchise 

a single person. 

The question to you was the scale. If there is a person who when 

we have penalties and I am for enforcing the law, if someone fraudulently votes and they are not eligible to vote, I am for prosecuting 

them; but what I am saying is why would we prosecute 275,000 

people who are not middle class, they don’t get on airplanes, they 

don’t need a photo ID. They are unbanked so they don’t need a 

photo ID. 

They are students, they live in the dorm, they are poor, they 

move three times a year so even if they had a photo ID, so even 

if they have a photo ID, it may not have the correct address on it. 

And I am asking you how you rationalize disenfranchising over 

a quarter of million people when there is no connection between 

having a photo ID and having the right to vote. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
34 

Why can’t—what is wrong with our system now where you can— register in advance, but if you go on election day, you can go there 

and show your utility bill, current utility bill, you can have your 

mother corroborate that you turned 18 two months ago and sign an 

affidavit under penalty of law that you are who you say you are, 

what—how do you rationalize that. 

Mr. NEY. We are way over time, but since you have been posed 

a question, please answer, and then we will move to Mr. Ehlers. 

Mr. LEIBHAM. Actually I want to encourage the committee like 

we have done in Wisconsin as you are reviewing any photo ID proposal across the nation that you seek information from the states 

in regard to other areas in which they require a photo ID. 

If you look at Wisconsin, we require a photo ID for a individual 

who receives food stamps. To apply for the food stamp program you 

have to have a state issued photo ID. 

If you are a student who is wanting to take the ACT or SAT, you 

have to have a photo ID in Wisconsin to be able to participate in 

the program. 

As Congressman Green indicated, just recently to purchase cough 

medicine in Wisconsin, Governor Doyle signed a law that requires 

a photo ID for an individual to purchase cough medicine. 

And we have other provisions that require individuals of all economic stature and all background to have state IDs for state law. 

I think it is rational to suggest in an election process in which 

we are simply trying to confirm the identify of an individual who 

already under law has to register, we are simply asking them to 

identify themselves with a photo ID. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. NEY. Okay. 

Mr. EHLERS. There appears to be a little disagreement on this 

issue. 

Now, let me ask you, in Wisconsin, when someone registers to 

vote, do they receive a card indicating that they are registered to 

vote and giving the polling place where they are supposed to vote, 

giving the address? 

Mr. LEIBHAM. State law does not require that, but some communities do have processes in which they send out voter cards to individuals. It is typically in more smaller towns that continue that 

practice and that is one area we are looking at in the special committees. 

For instance, through the requirement of HAVA for the voter 

registration to bring consistency how that preregistration and 

preelection day activity takes place. 

Mr. EHLERS. I am surprised it is a not a state requirement. I 

would certainly suggest it is a first step. 

I find the arguments against a photo ID not very convincing. 

It is not that—as I say, Michigan has a state issued ID, it is not 

a voter ID, but it is a state issued ID. And millions of people get 

those because they find that very useful to have, and it does not, 

in my experience in Michigan, seem to impose any burden whatsoever in terms of getting that information and that card. 

So I am really puzzled by the opposition. It makes me suspect 

that the opposition is fairly political, and I am not here to raise 

partisan planes at all, but it seems strange that the Democrats 

seem to be opposed to it. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
35 

I heard your comment that there is not wide-spread fraud, and 

I read the account, and I would agree the evidence does not appear 

that there is wide-spread fraud in Wisconsin. 

The same cannot be said for some of your neighbors not too far 

to the south, but there is always the potential there. 

And the point of voter laws is to try to ensure the integrity of 

the election. 

When you have elections decided by 11,000 votes out of an entire 

state, it doesn’t take very much fraud or error to change the result, 

and it seems to me the goal should be to try to use every means 

possible. 

The controversy here seems to settle in voter ID, picture ID I 

should say, but that’s only part of it. And Representative Colon, 

you made that comment, you have all of these other things you 

should do. 

I agree you should do those. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t 

have a picture ID as well, if that is becoming a problem in this 

state. 

Very few states have it, but more and more are getting it because 

there is more and more fraud across the country occurring, and it 

doesn’t have to be widespread. It can be just individuals doing this 

and not, not distinguishing by wide spread I mean organized fraud 

where a group, a party, or a set of individuals decides to organize 

fraud. 

There is not too much of that in America although there is some, 

but certainly there is a lot of individual fraud going on and that’s 

what we want to stop as well. 

In order to speed things along since we have to move along, Mr. 

Chairman, I won’t ask any questions at this point. 

Mr. NEY. Thank you. One note before I move on to Mr. Green. 

I was asking the staff, and Mr. Ehlers and I were involved in looking at election over eight years ago. 

If I recall, 720 people that voted were not citizens of the United 

States. 

Mr. EHLERS. We suspect far more, but it was very—— Mr. NEY. Very close congressional race, there were quite a few 

people, but there were quite a few people that were not citizens of 

the United States that voted in the congressional election. 

And so we have always historically being on this Committee, 

viewed that if you had a way to—if you knew that person was a 

citizen or not, call me old fashioned, but I think you ought to be 

a citizen of the United States to vote in elections. 

We went through that. I wanted to make it as a side note. It was 

a considerable amount of people, quite a close election that had no 

form of ID, and there they went, they registered, and they were not 

citizens. 

So we have a little bit of history on the issue. 

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, as you recall, I chaired the contested 

election committee. Pretty close to the worst experience of my life. 

And I was dismayed to find the extent—really was an eye opener 

to the extent of the fraud, the state’s errors, etcetera, and shows 

we have a long way to go on election law. 

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I am old fashioned, too. I could not 

agree with you more that I don’t want noncitizens to vote. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
36 

The fact is that noncitizens can get driver’s licenses. 

Mr. EHLERS. Well, I am against that, too. 

Mr. NEY. Mr. Green. 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As I did my questions, 

something I wanted to clear up. 

A couple of times we have heard the statement that investigators 

have not found fraud in Wisconsin. That’s simply not true. In fact 

I am looking right here at the public statement that said they did 

find clear evidence of fraud in the November elections and the 

analysis was none the less it was unlikely that there would be 

much prosecution because, not my words here, city records are so 

sloppy, it will be difficult to establish cases that will stand up in 

court, but they did say they had clear evidence of fraud. 

The other thing I wanted to mention, I want to make it clear we 

are obviously in Milwaukee for a variety of reasons, but the whole 

issue of photo ID is one that is important statewide including in 

Milwaukee. 

The public polls that we have seen show very strong support 

across more than two to one and majority support right here in the 

City of Milwaukee, so sometimes these issues get cast and at least 

in our state and Milwaukee versus the state, that is simply not 

true. 

The question I have though is Representative Colon, as you know 

the Carter-Baker Commission called for one of it’s principal recommendations of photo ID. It says, I am quoting, we are recommending a photo ID system for voters designed to increase registration. 

And then President Carter, obviously not a right wing zealot, and 

senior member of the commission, he says, ‘‘I personally had at the 

beginning some reservations about the issue. This will be, I think, 

a move forward in getting more people to vote. It would not restrict 

people from voting. 

It will uniformly apply throughout the country. It will be nondiscriminatory.’’

Why do you think that President Carter and the Carter-Baker 

Commission support a photo ID requirement for voting. 

Mr. COLON. I have no idea. Actually I can only tell you what happened in Wisconsin, and in Wisconsin of all that fraud that is 

claimed to have happened, one conviction has been obtained, only 

one. 

Mr. GREEN. As I said, the prosecutor said that it would be difficult because of sloppy records, but they said they found clear evidence of fraud. 

Mr. COLON. If you find fraud, you should prosecute it. It’s just 

that simple. 

Mr. GREEN. Even if you don’t have evidence. 

Mr. COLON. Well, if you don’t have evidence, you don’t have 

fraud. 

Mr. NEY. I would please note to the audience as I have before, 

do not show applause nor booing. Thank you. 

Mr. GREEN. Again, I think it is important to remember because 

you said a couple of times that there was no fraud, and again, you 

praised both our U.S. Attorney and our Milwaukee County D.A. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
37 

And they do say there is evidence of fraud, they said there was 

clear evidence of fraud. 

Mr. COLON. Simply bring the cases forward——

Mr. GREEN. But just to clarify, there was clear evidence of fraud, 

so it is inaccurate to say that there was not fraud. 

Mr. COLON. There is obviously two disagreements. 

There is obviously a disagreement about whether there was 

fraud. I happen to think that one conviction does not lead to widespread fraud. I happen to believe Attorney—U.S. Attorney General 

Steven Biskupic on the issue because he has looked, he has the 

power, and he is in fact the one that we rely on to bring those cases 

along——

Mr. GREEN. He was the one I was citing here. He was the one 

who said that there was fraud. 

Mr. COLON. I understand. I am saying if there is evidence of it, 

we certainly would like to know and there is evidence of it, we have 

all of these courts right in this building ready to go. 

If he has evidence, he should bring the cases forward. 

If he can’t prove it, then maybe an issue as to the quality of the 

lawyering or something else, but it is not the issue. 

The evidence is what rules a courtroom. We all understand that. 

Now secondly, on the issue of the Carter Commission, there has 

been sent—I can’t speak for the Carter Commission, I don’t know 

it, I know what occurred through the media and so forth, but ultimately, this is Wisconsin and in Wisconsin we allow people to vote. 

And if we are going to error on the side of something, we are 

going to error on the side of democracy. 

If we are going to error on the side of a few mistakes which is 

all that has been found, we are going to allow people to participate. 

The fact is that tradition goes back to the beginning of our state, 

and it will continue. I have no doubt. 

We have a agreement, but I think our agreement as Congressman Ehlers indicated, it is much narrower. I agree with Senator 

Leibham that there are many things we can do to provide a better 

election system. I just don’t believe the punishment to be further 

barriers to those who actually participate in good faith. 

By and large, all of those people who participate legally and with 

the faith that those systems that are run by the good poll workers 

in our neighborhood are run for the benefit of good election results. 

I think we agree on that. 

Mr. GREEN. Mr. Chairman, my time has expired. 

Mr. NEY. I want to thank both the Senator and Representative 

for your time today and the members of the Committee. Thank you. 

We will move on to panel 2. Panel 2 will consist of Kevin Kennedy, Executive Director of the Wisconsin State Elections Board; 

Sharon Robinson, Director of the Milwaukee Department of Administration; Susan Edman, Executive Director of the Milwaukee Election Commission; and Kathy Nickolaus, Waukesha County clerk. 

Thank you. I appreciate all of you being here, and we will start 

with testimony of Mr. Kennedy. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
38 

STATEMENT OF KEVIN J. KENNEDY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF 

THE WISCONSIN STATE ELECTIONS BOARD 

Mr. KENNEDY. Thank you, Chairman Ney, Congressman Ehlers, 

Congresswoman Moore and Congressman Green. I really appreciate the opportunity to be here. 

I have provided additional copies of my testimony as requested, 

and what I would like to talk about a little bit is Wisconsin’s 

unique situation in administering elections, just in case I do not 

have it I have two maps of the state of Wisconsin which I would 

offer for the committee, they are part of my testimony on page 18. 

Mr. NEY. Without objection. 

[The information follows:] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
39 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 69 26272A.015
40 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 70 26272A.016
41 

Mr. KENNEDY. These maps illustrate some of the uniqueness in 

Wisconsin in terms of complying with the Help America Vote Act 

in terms of voter registration in the State of Wisconsin and the 

type of voting in the state of Wisconsin. 

The Packer colored map, green and yellow, is voter registration. 

Wisconsin currently does not have voter registration. Under 5,000 

as part of the Help America Vote Act, we have enacted legislation 

that all of our municipalities will have it. In some of the small municipalities in yellow, when you walk in to vote, people know you 

or they recognize you, and that has been our protection. We can’t 

ask for identification for those individuals. 

Starting in 2006, every voter will be required to be registered to 

vote. Wisconsin also has election day registration preferred, and in 

those municipalities which is about three quarters of our voting age 

population, we find that 20 percent of the people who come to the 

polls either registered for the first time or make some change to 

their registration such as changing their name or their address, 

highly mobile population. 

Those individuals do provide identification, that identification is 

consistent with the requirements of the Help America Vote Act for 

first time voters. 

We have provisional voting but only for first time voting currently in Wisconsin. In the 2004 election, 374 individuals were required to cast provisional ballots out of the three million votes that 

were cast in the state of Wisconsin. That is because we have election day registration, those individuals who did not have that identification be registered at the polling place in most cases. That was 

something we worked very hard for as part of the Help America 

Vote Act was to provide for that. 

That provisional voting is usually quite frankly a fail-safe catch 

up for the type of errors that creep in through the voter registration process. 

I think the thing that I have to emphasis the most, besides the 

uniqueness in terms, illustrated by the two maps, is that the election process is really about people. 

In Wisconsin, we have 2,000 elected officials, we run our elections at the municipal level. That’s why the maps are coded at the 

municipal level. 

The clerks are the ones that equip, hire, and train the poll workers. Most—that includes 1850 municipal clerks, and 72 county 

clerks, deputies, and individuals in our office. 

We have about 20,000 poll workers at our November election, 

working on that and they deal with about three million voters in 

the last election. 

All of these people are affected by the various legislative proposals, and it is generally through those areas where I think we 

find a lot of the concerns. 

As Wisconsin’s chief election officer, to tell you I welcome the 

level of scrutiny that we have had to endure since 2000. I think it 

helps illustrate some of the issues that not only our office but the 

county clerks and municipal clerks have to wrestle with. 

There are a lot of challenges because of all the people that are 

processed in terms of that. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
42 

The second map illustrates the challenges we have in dealing 

with the Help America Vote Act requirement in terms of equipping 

polling places for individuals with disability. 

We are a paper driven state. Some of those municipalities have 

70 voters, 150 voters, 200 voters, and it is a real challenge to bring 

in something other than paper ballots. 

On that map, I forgot the color, I think it is green is the paper 

ballot coding, and you will see how much territory even though it 

is about 12 percent of the voters in our state. 

Let me conclude my testimony, I will certainly welcome comments, but I want to say how much I did appreciate the scrutiny 

that is going on because it is only going to improve our process, but 

to reemphasis as we moved forward the election process including 

voter registration and voting equipment is about people, voters, 

local election officials and their participation in the electoral process. We will always have to balance the constitutionally protected 

right for eligible citizens to participate in the electoral process with 

the public policy that ensures participants have the utmost integrity of that that requires significant balancing. It requires commitment of government resources that has not been available in the 

past despite the infrastructure that HAVA has made which has allowed us to put together statewide voter registration system, to 

allow us to put accessible voting equipment in. 

It is not enough in terms of the commitment that we have and 

continue to go. Thank you very much. 

[The statement of Mr. Kennedy follows:] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
43 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 75 26272A.017
44 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 76 26272A.018
45 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 77 26272A.019
46 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 78 26272A.020
47 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 79 26272A.021
48 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 80 26272A.022
49 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 81 26272A.023
50 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 82 26272A.024
51 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 83 26272A.025
52 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 84 26272A.026
53 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 85 26272A.027
54 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 86 26272A.028
55 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 87 26272A.029
56 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 88 26272A.030
57 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 89 26272A.031
58 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 90 26272A.032
59 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 91 26272A.033
60 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 92 26272A.034
61 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 93 26272A.035
62 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 94 26272A.036
63 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 95 26272A.037
64 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 96 26272A.038
65 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 97 26272A.039
66 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 98 26272A.040
67 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 99 26272A.041
68 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 100 26272A.042
69 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 101 26272A.043
70 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 102 26272A.044
71 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 103 26272A.045
72 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 104 26272A.046
73 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 105 26272A.047
74 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 106 26272A.048
75 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 107 26272A.049
76 

Mr. NEY. Thank you. Ms. Robinson. I went down the order. 

STATEMENT OF SHARON ROBINSON, CHAIR OF CITY OF 

MILWAUKEE ELECTION TASK FORCE 

Ms. ROBINSON. Congressman Ney, Congresswoman Moore, and 

committee members, I am honored to be here today in my capacity 

as chair of the City of Milwaukee election task force and also remark on the topic of election reform. 

The protection of voting rights is perhaps the most fundamental 

of all rights guaranteed by the U.S. Democratic form of government 

and implicit in that right is the right to have one’s vote count and 

have an election process that guarantees the cleanest and fairest 

elections possible. 

Both the 2000 and 2004 exposed the many challenges facing our 

election system. Major cities across America experienced unusually 

high voter turnouts, record numbers of absentee voters, and questions surrounding how the November 2004 election was conducted. 

Like many other cities located in key battleground states, Milwaukee will continue to be a spotlight of national attention in presidential and gubernatorial years. I can assure you that Milwaukee’s Mayor and our city workers are committed to improving our 

election system while honoring the great traditions of our state. 

We should all take pride in knowing that Wisconsin has been one 

of the most progressive states in eliminating barriers to voting and 

maximizing voter participation. 

In 2004, Wisconsin had the second highest voter turnout in the 

country, second to Minnesota. South Carolina on the other hand 

which has the most restrictive voting laws on the books, experienced the lowest turnout in the entire country. 

Recognizing the needs to modernize Milwaukee’s election system, 

Mayor Barrett formed the Milwaukee—City of Milwaukee Election 

Task Force. The Mayor charged the task force with proposing specific, practical changes to improve the city’s election process in 

ways that would guarantee efficient elections and restore pride and 

confidence in our system. 

As a result of our comprehensive review, the task force found imperfections with the city’s election system and mistakes that occurred in the November, 2004, that were unacceptable. Most of the 

problems can be attributable to the sheer size of the election as 

well as staffing and training issues. 

Under the capable leadership of election commission executive director Susan Edman, the city has already taken steps to document 

standard operating procedures, enhance training, and recruit more 

poll workers. 

Poll workers do their jobs admirably and often under very difficult situations; however, the task force found tremendous potential for improvement in the recruitment, training, and development 

of poll workers. 

When conducting a post-election review of the November 2004 

election, the election commission found inspector statements that 

were not filled out accurately and completely. In addition, many 

election poll list vote totals were not reconciled to the machine recorded vote totals at the end of election day. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
77 

As a result of these inconsistencies, inaccuracies, and incomplete 

poll books and inspector statements, there were discrepancies between the total number of voters recorded and the total number of 

ballots cast. 

These discrepancies have been the subject of intense media scrutiny, but contentions of fraud have been overblown. 

The task force has not found any evidence to conclude that these 

mistakes were based on fraud or the willful neglect of any poll 

worker. 

This find is consistent with the preliminary findings of the joint 

task force led by the U.S. Attorneys Office. A recent investigation 

by the Wisconsin legislative audit bureau also reflects similar findings. Last fall, over 200 felons did cast votes illegally. There was 

virtually nothing the city could have done to stop these citizens 

from voting who, by the way, ironically used their own names. 

However, a major task force recommendation would discourage 

felons from casting votes by requiring municipalities to include a 

clear statement on voter registration cards explaining that felons 

on paper are prohibited from voting. 

Another key recommendation calls for tighter controls for deputy 

registrars such as tracking their activity and banning pay based on 

a quota system. 

Perhaps the most important message I want to convey today is 

the need to infuse more resources into elections. 

If we really want to improve the way we conduct elections in this 

state, the solution is that management and adequate funds so cities 

don’t have to continue trying to conduct elections on the cheap. 

Without adequate funding, we will get what we pay for. 

As we continue to explore the topic of election administration in 

Wisconsin and ponder proposals for reform, I hope that everyone 

in this room will walk away with a spirit of bipartisan cooperation 

and a real willingness to work together to implement meaningful 

election reforms. 

We all owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to the brave men and 

women who gave their lives for the cause of civil rights and the 

right to vote in this country. 

So let’s approach our work with honor and in recognition of their 

tremendous sacrifice. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. 

[The statement of Ms. Robinson follows:] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
78 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 113 26272A.050
79 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 114 26272A.051
80 

Mr. NEY. Thank you. Ms. Edman. 

STATEMENT OF SUSAN M. EDMAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF 

CITY OF MILWAUKEE ELECTION COMMISSION 

Ms. EDMAN. Good morning Chairman Ney, Congresswoman 

Moore, and committee members, as the newly appointed executive 

director of the City of Milwaukee’s election commission, I would 

like to thank you for the opportunity to speak this morning on election reform. I believe it is highly advantageous to the process of initiating effective changes to Wisconsin election systems to include 

those individuals with direct involvement in elections. 

I believe that it is these individuals that have the greatest capacity to determine what election administrative changes will improve 

the integrity and accuracy of future elections as well as maintain 

Wisconsin’s long-standing commitment to fair, open, and accessible 

elections. 

As election reform leaders, our work must be thoughtful, appropriate, and warranted. It cannot be impulsive, superficial, politically motivated, or enacted to distill a false sense of public confidence. 

At this time there is unprecedented activity in the state of Wisconsin and across the country relative to election reform. 

I am confident that administrative systems are being assessed in 

Wisconsin municipalities to ensure that systemic problem experienced in the 2004 election will not reoccur in future elections. Additionally, the bipartisan legislative committee on election reform has 

recently completed a two-year review of Wisconsin election laws 

and are in the process of compiling a legislative package that fully 

addressed the state’s statutes that are outdated and applicable, 

and in some instances a hindrance to clean elections. 

Completion of this work coupled with a comprehensive reform 

package will further Wisconsin’s position as a state with clean, fair 

elections. 

I am respectfully asking the members of this committee, Wisconsin legislators, and Governor Doyle to support the thorough and 

thoughtful work of the Milwaukee Election Task Force, the special 

committee on election law and the legislative council on election reform. 

I ask for your support in allowing for the full implementation of 

the work of these three groups before proposing additional legislation. 

Allow me to share with you a recent statistic regarding voter 

participation in the City of Milwaukee. There are an estimated 

430,000 eligible voters in the City of Milwaukee. 

Of that 430,000, 85 percent are registered with the election commission to vote. That number is significant and represents a voter 

dedication and parties participation far higher than many municipalities throughout the country. 

Allegations of voter fraud during the 2004 presidential election 

warranted a comprehensive review of the city’s election system as 

well as state statutes regarding elections. 

The city is sincerely grateful to Sharon Robinson, the chair of the 

Election Task Force, as well as the other city government and community leaders that conducted that assessment and completed a 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
81 

plan of action that is appropriate and one that will result in effective election reform measures. 

You already heard Ms. Robinson speak to the opportunities for 

improvement that were identified through the work of the Milwaukee Election Task Force. I am here to assure you that the Milwaukee Election Commission has already made significant progress 

in implementing these recommendations. 

We have begun the process of purging the Milwaukee’s registered 

voters of over 40,000 inactive voters to ensure reliable poll lists. 

We have promoted a system for processing absentee ballots that 

will allow the highest level of quality assurance. 

We have restructured the staff of the Milwaukee Election Commission to establish greater levels of efficiency effectiveness, and 

accountability. 

We have contributed to the full implementation of the statewide 

voter registration system that will greatly reduce voter registration 

database issues including duplicate registration, deceased voters, 

and voters that moved outside of the municipalities. 

We have facilitated several poll worker feedback sessions in 

order to ensure that all—to establish standardized best practices 

for operating a polling places. 

We have partnered with community groups and persons with disabilities in order to ensure that all eligible voters, regardless of a 

disability, can vote independently and privately in the City of Milwaukee. 

We have initiated a split shift for poll workers to alleviate poll 

worker fatigue on busy election days. 

We have fully revised our poll worker training program to expand the training from one hour to two hours and made participation in training mandatory. We are about to launch a poll worker 

recruitment campaign. Our hope is to recruit another 250 workers 

by spring election and another 500 additional poll workers prior to 

the fall election. 

Mr. NEY. I would note your time has expired. If you would like 

you may summarize and enter the rest for the record. 

Ms. ROBINSON. I would like to point out that the City of Milwaukee remains fiscally dedicated to clean, accurate, and accessible 

local elections at a time when significant reductions to the City’s 

budget have become necessary. 

It is equally important to note that while Wisconsin legislators 

are exploring election reform legislation, there has not been a 

meaningful discussion of appropriating state or federal funds to 

support improving election systems. 

As we move ahead on election reform, we must ensure that our 

responses to the problems identified in the 2004 presidential election are again appropriate and warranted. Thank you. 

Mr. NEY. Thank you very much. 

[The statement of Ms. Edman follows:] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
82 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 120 26272A.052
83 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 121 26272A.053
84 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 122 26272A.054
85 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 123 26272A.055
86 

Mr. NEY. The last witness is Ms. Nickolaus. 

STATEMENT OF KATHY NICKOLAUS, WAUKESHA COUNTY 

CLERK 

Ms. NICKOLAUS. Chairman Ney, members of the committee on 

House Administration, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to speak about election administration in Wisconsin 

and possible proposals for reform. 

As the county clerk, one of my jobs is to protect and promote 

public trust and confidence by administering accurate and fair elections. I ask that you consider some changes and additions to current laws that would give me the tools to better serve my constituency as well as ensure fair elections. I will cover them in the next 

five minutes. 

As you heard, the Carter-Baker Commission in September made 

some recommendations in a report on federal election reform, recommendation 2.5.1 was to require voters to use an ID to ensure the 

person on the poll list is the person voting. 

You also heard mentioned that our state legislature has passed 

three bills requiring photo ID to ensure that integrity, but our Governor has vetoed them. 

In a poll conducted at the beginning of this month by the Wisconsin policy research institute, Wisconsin residence were asked 

their opinions on photo ID requirement. Statewide the results were 

69 percent in favor. My county, 93 percent surveyed favored the requirement, and in areas of the state such as the City of Milwaukee 

and the City of Madison, 60 percent were reported in favor. This 

is not a partisan issue. 

During the trial in Milwaukee for a person accused of voting 

twice, the jury was hung. The district attorney from Waukesha 

County has been quoted as saying I know a person voted in 

Waukesha County and voted once in Milwaukee, but because I 

don’t have written documentation of it, I can’t move on it. 

His investigation investigators were unable to prosecute other 

cases of people voting twice in the 2004 presidential election because there was not adequate proof according to the D.A. 

Requiring a photo ID such as proposed by Congressman Green’s 

Vote Act would rectify these situations. As an election administrator, it is difficult to answer the questions of a voter who calls 

after going to vote and found that someone has voted for her or 

someone notices his deceased wife has marked—was marked as 

having voted. 

Also included in the Carter-Baker Commission report was a remark, and I quote, ‘‘uniformity and procedures of voter registration 

identification is essential to guarantee the free exercise of the vote 

by all U.S. Residents.’’

In Wisconsin we have same day registration with the ability to 

have someone vouch for residency. Let’s take a look at a possible 

scenario. It is the presidential race and Wisconsin has same day 

registration with a residency requirement of 10 days. 

If someone would like to change that outcome of the election by 

swinging Wisconsin votes towards one candidate, they could have 

people come from out of state, live in Wisconsin for 10 days, maybe 

work on the campaign. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
87 

This gives them the ability to vote in Wisconsin instead of the 

state in which they came from. They don’t need documentation because they can ask the person that they are staying with to vouch 

for them. 

State auditor Jan Mueller wrote that ‘‘current voter registration 

practices are not sufficient to ensure the accuracy of voter registration lists used by poll workers.’’

This is not a small number of people who register the same day 

on election. In Milwaukee alone in the city there were 77,000 people who voted at the polls and of the 77,000, 4,900 of them could 

not be verified as valid. 

As a state by the Commission—as stated by the Commission’s report, uniformity is essential. Residency for voting should be the 

same length of time no matter what state you live in and you 

should not have the ability to have someone vouch for you. 

We know that voter verified paper audit trails were not required 

by the Help America Vote Act, but are being considered as a requirement in many states. As part of the legislative election reform 

committee, we discuss the inconsistencies in our state between 

counties. 

According to selection line dot org, 15 states require the recount 

to be done on the paper ballot or on a paper trail instead of the 

electronic machines, but two states require a recount to be done on 

the election machines. 

Either way, there are possibilities for failure again, but again the 

consistency throughout the United States would help electorate 

stop questioning why one state’s election process is different from 

another. 

In the legislative reform committee, we discuss training our poll 

workers. Currently only our chief inspector is required to go 

through training provided by the state. We believe that all poll 

workers should require some training. 

When I speak to people, other election administrators outside of 

the state, their requirements for poll workers are either lacking 

like ours or required many hours of training. 

A federal requirement would ensure excellence and competence 

in maintaining the highest level of accuracy of elections across the 

nation. 

Mr. NEY. Your time has expired so if you like you may summarize. 

Ms. NICKOLAUS. In closing, I want to reiterate that the problems 

we see in Wisconsin and elsewhere are urgent ones, they demand 

speedy and decisive action. Free and fair elections are a bedrock 

component of American democracy. Any diminishment of integrity 

our electoral process damages our democracy, undermines our people’s faith in their government, and threatens our nation as a 

whole. 

Thank you for coming to our part of the country. 

Mr. NEY. Thank you very much. 

[The statement of Ms. Nickolaus follows:] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
88 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 129 26272A.056
89 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 130 26272A.057
90 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 131 26272A.058
91 

Mr. NEY. In drafting the Help America Vote Act, we were very 

careful to do a few things. One, the EAC that was established 

which is two and two, Democratic, Republican has no rule-making 

ability. I did not want to create the EPA of elections where you get 

a new rule and regulation every week and then they say. ‘‘Well, the 

authors of the bill, did you mean this, no? Well we are going to do 

that any way.’’ I did not want the federal bureaucracy to run your 

elections here in Milwaukee or in Utah or Ohio or anywhere in the 

nation. So we kind of had a balance between trying to do things 

we thought were standard without federalizing the elections. 

I was a large believer and still believe today that the blind have 

the right to vote in secrecy. The Help America Vote Act, for the 

first time in people’s lives, allows the blind to vote in secrecy. 

Now, you do have some complications and that’s what I wanted 

to ask you when you got the paper ballots. As of 2006, how do you 

intend to have the one precinct equipped for people who have a 

form of a disability. 

Mr. KENNEDY. We have set aside $18 million of our Help Amer- ica Vote Act Title II money which is roughly $6,000 for each polling 

place in the state to acquire a piece of equipment that will enable 

an individual with disabilities to vote privately and independently. 

The challenge of that is of course we put the equipment in there, 

the poll workers will have to be trained on that, the municipality 

will be responsible for the programming and the cost may be 

shared. 

The ongoing costs are going to be a real challenge and some of 

those places we are dealing with individuals who are complete municipality where this equipment—anyone may be able to use it. 

There may be no one who really benefits from it from that advantage and that’s the push back that I get from the locals is we have 

not had to deal with this. 

We explain the law to them, we are prepared to deal with it. We 

tested the equipment. We have got two vendors that finally got 

through our process in Wisconsin. We don’t just let any vendor 

walk in and sell, they have to go through the process of qualifying 

standards, voluntary standards that have been established in the 

new ones. 

We have gone through two vendors now that we will be recommending to the board for that and will be prepared. My sense is 

it that for the April elections, every polling place will be in the position to have that. We have put a condition on that though that 

we will not give that $6,000 for reimbursement unless the polling 

place is physically accessible and we have surveyed all of the polling places, of the 2800 polling places, a 1,000 that may still need 

some changes. 

Mr. NEY. That was the one requirement we had. When it came 

to a person who had some form of a disability, we use the blind 

as an example, but there are height issues, there is access, wheelchairs, there is a lot of different considerations. 

But the one requirement was that one polling place—some people 

argue. ‘‘Well, a small area where we only have 300 voters, we have 

no one that is blind’’—well, you might have somebody that moves 

into the community that is blind or has some type of access issues, 

or is in a wheelchair. That was the one thing we did. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
92 

Now, this is the first federal money in the history of the United 

States through the Help America Vote Act, Partisan Hoyer and I 

pushed quite heavily and worked with the leader Dick Gephardt 

and now Leader Pelosi and Speaker Hastert and we reached the 

three billion mark. We have about $900 million more so this is not 

an unfunded mandate. 

We are pretty intent on trying to get that money from the federal 

government, but we always do work with groups across the country, advocacy groups, that would never pay a dime for that. We 

do—what we do that. 

But I was curious to see how you would meet that one requirement. 

I just want to ask very quickly what is your reaction to the joint 

task force finding that there were 4500 more ballots cast than individuals recorded as having voted in the city of Milwaukee? 

Mr. KENNEDY. If I could address that first I would like that opportunity. 

I have been working as Wisconsin’s chief election officer for 23 

years, and I think the disparity quite frankly is poll workers’

record keeping issues. There is no question that we are able to document certain individuals should not have been able to vote, but 

that is not the record keeping issue. The felons voting more than 

once. 

But in Milwaukee we have situations where we issue a number 

as the voter comes in, gives their name on that, but we also for 

election day registration are processing them through a separate 

line. We have noticed poll workers are sometimes not sharing that 

numbering system, we have noticed that absentee ballots which we 

process, a number may not be assigned to that, and we had a 

unique situation in this election in Milwaukee because the voter 

registration system that they use was antiquated, the staff was not 

prepared, and this is going to change. I am—I have every confidence. 

Mr. NEY. So what you are saying is the 4500 were live human 

beings? They were not recorded, is that what you are saying? 

Mr. KENNEDY. Not properly recorded and did not go through the 

process we have in state law to reconcile that and the county did 

not go through the secondary review process. 

There is no reason why the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel should 

have discovered this two weeks after the election. It should have 

been caught at the polling place on election night. It should have 

been corrected there. We have processes for doing that or should 

have been caught in the Milwaukee County board of election commissioner’s office. 

Mr. NEY. I will listen to anyone else who has something to say 

on this issue, I think your answer: obviously it is 4,500 extra votes 

being dumped in there—that you don’t know what happened. And 

the study the newspaper released caused quite a debate. 

What you are saying is that it was ‘‘record’’ keeping at the local 

level, they did vote; it was just not marked down. 

But the thing that I noted, too, preliminary findings of joint task 

force possible election fraud and this is an interesting thing for the 

future based on the investigation to date, the task force has found 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
93 

wide-spread record keeping failures and separate areas of voter 

fraud which could have been the one felon. 

This is an interesting statement on the task force. These findings 

impact each other. Simply put, it is hard to prove a bank embezzlement if the bank cannot tell how much money was there in the 

first place. Without accurate records, the task force will have difficulty proving criminal conduct beyond a reasonable doubt in a 

court of law. With that caveat, the task force has made the following specific determinations. 

So what they are saying is fraud, but you don’t know if—in the 

first place you don’t have the same page information to work off 

of. 

Mr. KENNEDY. I think you are right. That record keeping would 

have illustrated the problems we had were limited to a handful of 

felons, a handful of individuals who the process quite frankly can’t 

catch at this point without narrow investigation, and it is one of 

our responsibility of election officials right up to our office to make 

sure that the record keeping is adhered to because that is what is 

designed to install confidence for the public and the courts. 

Mr. NEY. Would Milwaukee election officials like to comment on 

the future of this. 

Ms. ROBINSON. Sure. I want to point out to the members of this 

committee that I served as the executive director of the Election 

Committee on an interim basis and during my tenure there, I actually after the spring election worked side by side with my counterpart at the county, Janice Dunn, and we scrutinized very closely 

the spring election and in fact we found similar problems that occurred in the spring election with discrepancies in voter counts 

versus ballots cast even though that was a very small election. 

And what I want to point out is what a consistent problem 

among the wards was the voter pink slip. We found that poll workers forgot to tear off the pink slip so therefore they used the same 

voter number twice. 

Mr. NEY. I am sorry. What is——

Ms. ROBINSON. There is a pink slip that says number 1. So in 

many instances even though this was an extremely small election, 

I had like for instance a polling site that 202 voters where a poll 

worker used the duplicate voting number twice. They forgot to tear 

that pink slip off. 

So basically what I am trying to point out is if you look at the 

spring election, we were careful in calling these poll workers, looking at every single vote, every single polling site, but there was discrepancies and imbalances. 

So it did demonstrate the need that we have some serious problems with poll worker training. 

But if you look at the discrepancies that occurred in the spring 

of 2004 versus November and looked at the proportions, similar 

error rates like the error rates actually were not that high when 

you looked at the—the total number of votes, so the error rates 

were way less than like 2 or 3 percent, but basically I am just trying to say that we have problems with poll worker training and we 

definitely are committed to enhancing our training and also want 

to point out that I am—I abhor any instance of fraud. I think it 

is horrible. But the real problems that occurred in November, 2004, 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
94 

and in the spring election again a lot of it was attributed to administrative error and errors that definitely need to be fixed. 

Mr. NEY. I want to keep on time. We have another panel, so I 

just wanted to ask one brief question. 

With the Help America Vote Act, we gave flexibility and I think 

it is important for training poll workers, and poll workers are great 

background. Carson Hoyer started a college program, I started a 

high school program to get young people involved in the election 

process to help at the polls. 

How did you distribute that, or is HAVA monies for voter education being concluded? Each state does it a little bit differently. 

Were you able to do that so you have the flexibility to use the 

money for poll worker education. 

Mr. KENNEDY. Basically the state is controlling all of the money, 

almost all of the money under the Help America Vote Act. As I 

said, we set aside 18 million for the statewide voter—accessible 

voting equipment. The bulk of the money was set aside for the 

statewide voter registration system because saw on the map, we 

are building from the ground up with 1500 municipalities that did 

not have voter registration or any kind of system. 

The state has taken the lead in terms of training election officials. Our state legislature actually requires the chief election inspector to go through a series of training, they set aside small 

amount of money with the Help America Vote Act, money came 

through. We took that over as a result of that. 

Prior to the 2004 election 8,000 poll workers and municipal and 

deputy clerks were trained through the basic training program. 

They are in the process. And we have an administrative rule that 

requires the chief election inspector, the person in charge of the 

polling place, to have six hours of training. 

Mr. NEY. And the state—the Help America Vote Act goes 

through the state and it went down through to poll workers. 

Mr. KENNEDY. Well, the state provides the training for the poll 

workers. 

Mr. NEY. So the state is paying for education. 

Mr. KENNEDY. The state is paying for it. 

Mr. NEY. California did it in a unique way; there were problems 

with it. 

Mr. KENNEDY. That’s right. Training the state. 

Mr. NEY. Training other people. So each state, I have not—this 

is one issue I have not heard a lot of complaints except after the 

California controversy how they used the money. We never told the 

states how to use the money but we surely intended it for poll 

worker education and voter education, so you have things to put up 

at the polls to tell people their rights, provisional balloting for example. 

We would have people that are told, ‘‘Oh, no, you already voted.’’

This happened in Ohio. And the young man was smart enough to 

say, ‘‘I don’t care. I want that ballot. Give it to me.’’

And he got the ballot and showed there was improper voting in 

his name. That’s also part of the voting education process of the 

voter knowing their rights and being educated. 

So through HAVA, those monies have come down to the local——


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
95 

Mr. KENNEDY. Money has not been distributed to the locals. It 

has been handled by the state. 

Mr. NEY. Do you have access to it? 

Mr. KENNEDY. The locals do not have access to it in that sense. 

The state takes the lead on that, and that was done quite frankly, 

we have so many municipalities. To develop a formula how to treat 

it, you end up—we get a bigger bang for the buck if the state is 

handling it. 

Mr. NEY. That is the last question, if you have a response. 

Ms. ROBINSON. No. 

Mr. NEY. Thank you. 

Ms. MOORE. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is very informative. This 

has been a great panel. The worker bees panel, people who get into 

the nuts and bolts of election. 

It is nice to see all of you again. Mr. Kennedy and Ms. Robinson, 

Edman and Nickolaus. 

I guess the first thing that I guess I want to sort of just congratulate all of you for really getting down to the nitty-gritty, participating on all the task force and really trying to come up with 

good solutions. 

I want to commend you for taking ownership for the administrative errors and problems and not try to figure out who to blame it 

on, but really confirming that there just are some problems with 

elections, administration, and I am hearing you as a member of 

Congress that you need the adequate resources in order to be able 

to do your jobs and to do them well. 

I was really happy to hear Mr. Kennedy in particular clear up 

the mysterious 7,000, 4600, 4900 votes that we hear about. They 

were largely due to administrative errors. 

Ms. Robinson in talking about how the poll workers did not place 

the appropriate numbers on there, but these were actual people 

who actually had a right to vote. 

But there were administrative errors. 

I guess my question for all of the panel is—are a couple of 

things. 

First of all, how would—it doesn’t seem that anyone except for 

Ms. Nickolaus thinks having a voter ID would have cleared up any 

of the—the problems that we faced on election day, that having a 

voter ID would have solved those problems. 

So I am asking you all again what your reaction is to the requirement for having a voter ID, and I want it in the context of 

the numbers of people, particularly in the City of Milwaukee, who 

would be disenfranchised were it for such a requirement. 

I have mentioned earlier those data that indicates that there is 

a huge disparity between people of color, young people, the elderly, 

who have photo IDs and those who do not. 

And also I want to ask you all about absentee ballots. About a 

quarter of the problems that were found were related to absentee 

balloting, and how would photo IDs and the requirement for photo 

IDs fit in with absentee ballot. 

I can have you all go down the line. First question is all of these 

administrative errors that were found, would photo IDs have kept 

these errors from occurring. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
96 

Ms. ROBINSON. Well, I—again, I was the chair of the City of Milwaukee Election task force and the administrative errors that we 

talked about with regard to discrepancies and vote total versus ballots cast, a photo ID would not have addressed that problem. 

Again, that was an administrative error problem. 

Even if you look at the issue with the felons that voted illegally, 

again, I think anyone who voted illegally you need to investigate 

that, but those people used their name. 

So I am not even convinced that a photo ID would have helped 

in that regard because photo IDs don’t even note that a individual 

is a felon anyway. 

Ms. MOORE. Or if they are a citizen or if they moved six times. 

Ms. ROBINSON. Right. 

Ms. MOORE. The last time they voted. 

Ms. ROBINSON. How many people might be disenfranchised in 

Milwaukee, we did have discussions among the task force about the 

whole issue of disenfranchisement and Milwaukee is probably a lot 

different than some of the districts of some of the other members 

of the congressional panel so there is a concern in Milwaukee about 

disenfranchising voters. 

For instance, Senator Colon actually pointed out some statistics 

about how many Hispanics don’t have photo IDs which was really 

high, how many African-Americans, how many women, so my concern is again that I think fraud is horrible, but I don’t necessarily 

think it is wise to institute a policy whereby basically you are punishing the innocent for the crimes of the guilty, and there were not 

many guilty people that we found to have committed fraud in Milwaukee on election day. 

Ms. MOORE. Ms. Nickolaus, with your permission. 

Ms. NICKOLAUS. When I was referring to voter ID being able to 

help, I was not stating that all of the problems that we had in Wisconsin elections would be rectified by showing a photo ID. I was 

stating that there are some that would be rectified. 

The idea that somebody is voting in your place, somebody that 

voted for someone deceased. It is also—a voter ID or photo ID 

would also help a poll worker that when some of them are having 

trouble hearing, if I say Nickolaus, they might be looking down the 

list and pick up Nicholas in a different area. Because we spell our 

names a little differently, looking at the photo ID, they can—they 

have something in front of them to match the name up. That’s another area that would help. 

Ms. MOORE. So I am Mary Smith and there are zillions of Mary 

Smiths. I present you with a photo ID. Does that tell you anything? 

When you consider the scale, the hundreds the 275,000 people that 

could be disenfranchised in the state, do you think it is worth it 

for that poll worker to have Mary Smith’s driver’s license in front 

of you which doesn’t tell you whether she is a citizen, doesn’t tell 

you whether she has voted in her home state of Ohio, doesn’t tell 

you anything except that she has passed the driver’s test. 

Ms. NICKOLAUS. I think what it will help to be able to prosecute. 

I quoted the district attorney stating that if—if a person were to 

vote in one place and vote in another place because they didn’t 

have to prove who they were, it could have been two different people who voted for me saying that——


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
97 

Ms. MOORE. I don’t want to be argumentative, but I want to 

point out that we—we would be able to prosecute one person more 

efficiently, but on balance, there is 275,000 people in the state that 

don’t have a photo ID, and that’s the point I am trying to make. 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. NEY. Time has expired. Mr. Ehlers. 

Mr. EHLERS. Thank you Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. EDMAN. I would like to respond to the Congresswoman 

Moore if I could. 

Mr. NEY. We have exceeded the time, so respond, but stop Mr. 

Ehlers’ time with the clock. 

Ms. EDMAN. I recently retired from the Milwaukee Police Department after twenty-eight years. We have seven police districts, three 

shifts at each district. Each shift does things differently, so we 

have 21 ways of doing things. 

They do things differently because of personalities, people like to 

do things differently. 

In the City of Milwaukee we have 202 polling sites. If you divide 

that into the 4,900 votes that we are concerned about, that’s 24 

votes per polling site. 

Some of our poll workers have very strong personalities and they 

like to do things their way. That created a lot of the problems that 

we had in the 2004 election. In future elections, they will have to 

follow the procedures in place because we won’t accept anything 

less than that. 

Mr. NEY. Mr. Ehlers. 

Mr. EHLERS. Perhaps you should hire ex-military people who 

know how to follow rules. 

Just a quick question for Mr. Kennedy. Did I understand you correctly that in yellow areas, there is no voter registration of any 

sort. 

Mr. KENNEDY. That’s correct. Since the state was created in 

1848, there has been no voter registration in those municipalities. 

They are all populations of less than 5,000. Very similar to North 

Dakota. You walk into the polling place, they either know you or 

recognize you. 

If they don’t, they may ask questions, and they are required to 

ask for identification if they don’t. 

Mr. EHLERS. I am surprised to hear that in a state as advanced 

as Wisconsin. 

Mr. KENNEDY. I think that’s one of the unique factors as we implement voter registration and talk about the uniformity issues 

identified through the various studies. 

Mr. EHLERS. Ms. Robinson, your comment about civil rights, we 

have all worked hard for and certainly one of the civil rights is 

every citizen has the right to vote, but the other part that we worry 

about in the Congress is not only that every single person has the 

right to vote but to have the assurance that no one else is voting 

improperly or illegally, which is a civil right as well, and that their 

vote not be diluted by that. 

And I just wanted to get that on the record because I think that 

is equally important. 

I am still troubled, a lot has been made by the voter ID. Wisconsin has to sort that out. If you are really worried about verifying 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
98 

or the difficulty getting people to get voter ID, it would be simple 

to set up now that we have electronic cameras, set them up in the 

voting place and take a picture of everyone who comes in to vote 

along with the address that they have given and so forth. At least 

you have a record then. If you don’t want to do it before then. 

You can certainly have a record and also use that to create a 

voter ID card which you can hand to people on the way out. 

I happen to be a physicist. I could design and build that system 

very simply and very cheaply if you really want to. 

That doesn’t take care of absentees, but it solves the problems 

that we have been talking about here. 

I am not as worried about that, and I am not as worried about 

the felons voting. I am very worried about the 7,000 votes greater 

than the number of people who were signed in as voting and another 1,300 or some people who have created similar problem. 

I am worried about the number of cards that were not mailed 

which the law says have to be mailed after someone has registered 

same day registration, and cards were filled out with addresses 

that don’t even exist, 1300 of them. That’s a lot. 

I am worried about the return cards that were sent back with no 

such address. 3,600. Don’t worry about the felons, that’s only 98 or 

whatever. 3,600 people voted and gave an address which doesn’t 

exist, and I am worried about the fact that 3,600 were not turned 

over to the D.A. 

I am also worried that many of those turned over to the D.A. 

have not been acted upon. I understand it is an overwhelming task, 

and I am not here to criticize Milwaukee or Wisconsin or anything, 

but at the politest rule I can think it is extremely sloppy work, and 

I don’t think you are going to solve those problems without some 

very firm steps on how you operate the elections. 

I don’t really have a question, but I certainly would be happy to 

answer any comments you have. 

Mr. KENNEDY. I would have one comment to that. I think you indicated it is very sloppy work and I think Ms. Edman made the 

comment it is not going to be tolerated, and I think she comes from 

a background send a message in Milwaukee and it is important as 

election officials to send a message that we are the ones that are 

responsible for people’s comfort level in the integrity of the process, 

and that means that we need to be sticklers for detail when it 

comes to that and I think that is an important message that has 

to come and it comes from our local election officials and it comes 

from the state election officials. 

Mr. EHLERS. I suggest you carry your weapon or sidearm. Mr. 

Kennedy, just a quick question for you. I started to read between 

the lines of your testimony and I get the impression that the Wisconsin state election board and you as executive director don’t have 

a great deal of authority or have not been given great authority 

under the constitution and law to deal with enforcing the restrictions on the Help America Vote amendment. Am I misreading you 

or is that part of the problem? 

Mr. KENNEDY. We have the authority to order election officials 

to conform with law. We have the authority to train them on what 

the legal requirements are. We don’t—we have civil enforcement 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
99 

authority for campaign finance which we have been doing for 30 

years but we do not have any civil enforcement authority. 

We do rely quite heavily on the moral suasion at our office, and 

we quite frankly rely on the fact that we have a very dedicated 

group of local election officials who by far are committed to that 

and they come to our presentation and they come to us with suggestions. 

Our county clerks don’t have direct responsibility for administering license, but they are ears in the process by and far. That 

is one of the reasons why Ms. Nicholaus is here. 

And I think people definitely can take some confidence that Milwaukee is going to have a much tighter ship based on my experience working with the folks that are there now. 

Mr. EHLERS. It is not just the city. I understand the county canvas did not even look over the results. Do you have enforcement 

authority over the counties? 

Mr. KENNEDY. The only enforcement authority we have would be 

we can order them to conform to the conduct of law. In terms of 

punishment, we don’t have much in terms of that. 

I think the action that led to the county looking at that publicly 

described event when the county revealed in the special committee 

that they did not do that activity for the city. They did it for everybody else and not the city and they could not explain it and they 

promptly changed their behavior as a result of that when I raised 

a question why they have not set a hearing on it. 

Mr. EHLERS. Well, maybe we need Mr. Green’s law after all. 

Ms. ROBINSON. I wanted to submit the official report of the election task force for the record and I appreciate your concerns and 

we are taking those seriously. 

In fact, every concern you raised is noted in this report, and we 

have had numerous recommendations for reforming our processes 

and practices at both the administrative and legislative level. For 

the record, I want to put this on the record it reflects we are serious about all those issues. 

Mr. EHLERS. Let me just make clear, I am not criticizing any one 

of you. You did not have the responsibility in this one, but I just 

wanted to give you my point of view on that. 

Mr. NEY. Mr. Green. 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you. And Ms. Robinson, I think—what you 

are hearing—I think—Milwaukee is a great city this is a great 

state and we do have great progressive traditions. I think part of 

the concern is if it can happen in Milwaukee, it can happen anywhere in the country. That’s why you hear such a focus on Milwaukee obviously with the history of the elections being so close as 

well. 

Mr. Chairman, I want to apologize in advance, as you know, I 

have a prior commitment and may not be able to stay for the questions for the third panel. 

As a result I would like to return one more time to the issue of 

photo ID. Obviously in many ways, it is the most controversial part 

of our discussion today. 

Remind folks nearly 70 percent of the people in state, statewide, 

all parts of the state favor a photo ID requirement including 60 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
100 

percent right here in the City of Milwaukee and 60 percent in the 

City of Madison. 

So there is widespread for this because I think people do see it 

as the first step in returning some faith to the election process. 

Now Ms. Nicholaus, in your written testimony you made some 

reference to one of the reasons for photo ID requirement. You said 

as an ex-election administrator it was difficult to answer the questions of a distraught voter who calls after going to vote and has 

found that someone has voted for her or someone notices his deceased wife was marked as having voted. 

Those are the obvious concrete ways, but it would seem to me it 

is more than that, and Ms. Robinson made a reference a few moments ago about concerns over changes that might punish the innocent. But Ms. Nicholaus, aren’t you concerned when people read 

stories of others having voted that are not legally entitled to vote, 

don’t you think that they’re concerned their vote gets canceled out. 

So election fraud, election irregularities whether or not they arise 

to the level of fraud or the level of being prosecuted, any time 

someone votes who should not have voted, they have wiped out the 

vote of an innocent person, an innocent voter somewhere else. 

Isn’t that the real reason it is so supported in your council? 

Ms. NICKOLAUS. Sure. 

Mr. GREEN. It seems to me when we talk about the rights of the 

innocent which we should, which should be our paramount concern, 

we have to be concerned about the rights of that innocent voter 

who does everything that we have asked he or she to do, goes to 

the polls fully believing that his or her vote is going to count, that 

they are making a difference in election, and then they go home 

and read of felons illegally voting, other people illegally voting, and 

then they say gee, I stood in line for a hour, I went to the effort, 

I am trying to support in democracy, I guess my vote doesn’t count 

because so and so voted who shouldn’t have voted. 

So it seems to me as we talk about the innocent here, we also 

have to remember the innocent voter who gets frustrated with the 

process because they read their vote has been canceled out who is 

not innocent. 

Ms. Edman, I think that we are all optimistic about what will 

happen in Milwaukee in the years ahead as Milwaukee tries to 

make changes to improve what we have all seen. Let me ask you 

this real quickly. 

You are fairly new on the scene in this process of election administration. What was your biggest surprise when you stepped into 

your appointed post of out of what you found in the current situation in Milwaukee with the elections? 

Ms. EDMAN. I think the amount of paperwork involved in the 

elections, the massive registration—number of registration cards 

and the—just the amount of work that is involved. People don’t understand. They don’t have a clue until they have experienced it. 

Mr. GREEN. In the Vote Act, and again obviously we are all focussing on the photo ID requirement, one of the things I would 

commend to you and everyone here, I agree with you in terms of 

the paperwork challenges and the administrative challenges and 

the challenges for poll workers to implement the requirements. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
101 

We worked hard to make sure that there is federal grant money 

available and we require the training of poll workers and require 

helping out states to administer the training of poll workers. 

Having these record high turnouts is a great thing, but obviously 

it puts a strain on the system and I think we recognize that so we 

are trying to take steps to make sure the funds are available in the 

future. Some would argue that it is not a federal issue. Those days 

are gone. 

Obviously people in Minnesota have to care about what goes on 

in Wisconsin because the future of the presidency may be in doubt. 

So I think you will see that Members of Congress on both sides 

of the aisle will do everything we can to make sure that training 

does take place and that we step up to the plate to try to make 

some of the funds available because it is a real challenge. We recognize that. 

Mr. NEY. And I would note for Mr. Green, and I realize he has 

another commitment, the third panel at the end of this hearing, we 

will request the member to keep open the record for 30 days so we 

can ask questions or insert additional materials. 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you. 

Mr. NEY. I am now going to go on to the third panel, but I wanted to point out that the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel recently reported that 3,600 verification cards were returned as undeliverable 

. . . these are cards sent to verify same day registrations and 1,300 

could not be sent at all. This is not the ‘‘over vote’’ we spoke about 

earlier today, but 4,900 ballots that we learned could not be 

verified after they were already counted. 

I will follow up with a question on that. I just want to conclude 

by saying I think it is productive for us. 

We get questioned all the time about the Help America Vote Act. 

Should we do more? Should we mandate the paper trail? Should we 

mandate photo ID? I think the Carter-Baker Commission, something we talked about today, is helpful and I think you can see 

from the tone of Mr. Green’s request to come here that it is helpful 

to have member participation. As we look down the road of elections, we don’t want to federalize them, but we do have to have 

some type of standardization on certain issues. 

But at the end of the day, my state and your great state, whatever state in this nation, there are certain things that the federal 

government isn’t able to solve. 

If there were lines, should the Congress say, ‘‘Well, in precinct 

B in Belmont County, Ohio, you are to put in three more machines, 

but in Milwaukee, precinct 4, you need to take away a machine.’’

I don’t think we can do that. 

A lot of the information we learn in these elections is helpful, 

and some of the problems will be solved at the local level, but 

again, some of it will be solved with the federal government, and 

has to be addressed by the federal government. 

And in situations like the last two elections, if these were blow 

out elections and were not close, we would all be sitting here talking about things in the country. But it was productive having the 

close elections to look at our whole election system, even with flaws 

and mistakes here. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
102 

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I do think the issue that you just 

raised really deserves a quick response. You talked about the 3600 

undeliverables. I think a lot of that has to do with the—the class 

or status of the mail and perhaps they can answer. 

For example, if it is Layton Street instead of Layton Boulevard, 

that would be undeliverable. 

If you give an address of an apartment building and you don’t 

put apartment 306 on it, that will be undeliverable. 

Am I wrong about that. 

Mr. NEY. I want to move on with the third panel. I will put it 

in writing. I am going to put it in writing. If you would like to put 

that——

Ms. MOORE. It deserves an answer. 

Mr. KENNEDY. My quick comment is legislative counsel made it 

one of its recommendations that poll workers ensure that the election day registration forms are legible and that is an issue. They 

have to provide identification that——

Mr. NEY. Don’t ask me to fill one out. 

Mr. KENNEDY. This is the poll worker’s responsibility. Election 

they have to provide identification and opportunity to match the information with that. 

And that’s again something where from my observations I don’t 

think we have spent the attention to detail that needs to be done 

at the polling place and that may require more workers. 

Mr. NEY. Again, I don’t want to take away the third panel’s time. 

In small areas, small towns where you are dealing with 300 people, 

people know where each other are from, who they are, who your 

dad and mom are and where you got your car loans from. 

But larger areas, of course, this comes more into question where 

people don’t know each other. 

Mr. KENNEDY. I will tell you that county seat of Trepelleau 

County, there are no street addresses. Everyone has a P.O. Box. 

They know where they live, but their mailing address is all P.O. 

Box. 

Mr. NEY. Any other—— Ms. ROBINSON. Just again, if you get a chance to review the election task force report, I think it will be helpful because it does 

highlight all the problems and provides solutions to the problems 

that occurred including the issues you just raised about the cards 

that were—the 1400 cards or whatever. 

Ms. EDMAN. I will make one additional comment. Kevin spoke 

about the errors that the poll makers make, the fact that the cards 

are illegible. Now, you come to when a data clerk enters these addresses, there is another set of errors that could occur in the processing of registration cards, so these are areas where errors could 

occur. 

You are talking 77,000 registration cards with errors. 

We don’t know if they are errors or people that don’t live at the 

locations. So there are many things going on we have to look at. 

Mr. NEY. Just to correct the record, noncitizens with a green card 

should have the right to drive in the United States, illegal aliens 

do not have the right. I want to thank the panel for your time. 

We will move on to panel 3, Kay Coles James, member of the 

Carter-Baker Commission on Federal Election Reform. We have 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
103 

Andrea Kaminski, executive director of League Of Women Voters 

Of Wisconsin, I am sorry, we don’t have name tags. Jeff Erlanger, 

community activist; Matt O’Neill, Attorney, Friebert, Finerty, and 

St. John, and Don Millis, attorney, Michael, Best, and Friedrich, 

LLP. Thank you and welcome. 

We will start with Kay Coles James. 

STATEMENT OF KAY COLES JAMES, CARTER/BAKER 

COMMISSION ON FEDERAL ELECTION REFORM 

Ms. COLES JAMES. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, and thank you 

for the opportunity to be here. It was a privilege and I would like 

to submit my written statement for the record. 

Mr. NEY. Without objection. 

Ms. COLES JAMES. For the sake of brevity it was a privilege serving on the Carter/Baker Commission for me on several levels. First 

of all, I grew up in Richmond, Virginia, at a time when voting was 

a risky endeavor in some parts of the south. My family was very 

involved in the civil rights struggle and remain so today. 

For me, it is indeed a privilege to be a part of a commission 

whose charge was to make sure that the voting process both had 

integrity and access for a lot of the American population. 

While I have presented to the committee a resume that lists several things, I want to highlight two things that were particularly 

germane. 

One, when I was director of the United States office of personnel 

management, it came as a surprise to many people that that particular job had a great deal to do with voting and with protecting 

the access for voting for several Americans. I was responsible for 

the portion of the voting rights act that authorized OPM to both 

train and provide observers to certain political subdivisions and 

other political units as determined by the attorney general, and 

also my service on this commission that I already mentioned, both 

I think provides some background for my particular interest in this 

subject. 

While Wisconsin has its own unique set of challenges, I can assure you based on the work of our commission they are not that 

unique for things that we see going on all around the country. 

I would also like to say that while the Carter/Baker Commission 

addressed a whole host of issues, I want to focus on one that seems 

to be the most controversial here today, and that is on the voter 

ID portion of that. 

I would like to, sort of I guess, stand the issue on its head. Coming out of my perspective and my background what was important 

to me was we look at making sure that every American who had 

the opportunity to vote, could do that and that their vote in fact 

counted. 

I would—I would ask you to look at the title of our commission 

report which was Building Confidence In U.S. Elections, and that 

is why after a great deal of discussion and a great deal of debate 

the members of this commission came to a conclusion that a voter 

identification was in fact necessary and we recommended that to 

the American people. 

To assure that the requirement of providing identification does 

not prevent, however, any eligible voter from participating, it was 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
104 

important to us that the ID be free of charge to all voters and that 

it also be accessible. 

The requirement of a photo ID combined with accurate State 

voter rolls, we believe, will prevent most opportunities for fraud 

and will increase voters confidence in the outcome of the election. 

And while I know there is a great deal of debate whether there 

is fraud or inconsistencies or inaccuracies, sort of the sense of the 

commission was never attribute malice where you could easily attribute and then fill in the blank. If it is lack of training, if it is 

lack of ability for funds, whatever the reason is, our ultimate goal 

was to increase the confidence in the system without delaying or 

pointing fingers at individuals. 

Some have mistakenly suggested that requiring voters to use ID 

would be a poll tax, and I want to say for the record that we believed it to be nothing of the sort. 

The vast majority already have a form of the required voter ID 

and others should be able to easily obtain the ID. States should 

take steps to assure the opportunity for all voters to obtain said ID. 

We have heard some testimony today about the fact that it would 

be cumbersome for students or poor people or minorities and a burden there, and quite frankly from my perspective, the desire to 

have a voter ID is in fact to assure that those very same people 

when they present themselves at the polling place are not denied 

the access to vote. 

So I think we all have the same goal in mind and we may get 

it—get at it from very different perspectives. 

My friend on the Commission, former Democratic congressman 

Lee Hamilton has noted that the recommendation of a photo ID 

will increase the confidence of the voters especially minorities and 

those low income voters that we have talked about. 

In the post 9/11 society where ID is required to enter a federal 

building, to cash a check, to board a plane, to take the SAT or to 

do most anything, I don’t think it is an undue burden to ask all 

American citizens to have that sort of ID. 

As a matter of fact in most emerging democracies it is really a 

badge of honor that one has acquired such an ID and is participating in the process. 

I think it is just good public policy, and I would also say that our 

commission was so diverse in its perspectives, and that you had 

strong advocates that were not shrinking violets and managed to 

express their opinion, yet we came together after debating this 

issue quite a bit and I would note that President Carter, Lee Hamilton, both well-known democrats and civil rights activists, like 

former Atlanta Mayor Andrew Young, as well as people that we all 

would recognize like Juan Williams all support voter ID, but maybe 

for different reasons or different perspectives but I think we all 

want the same thing and that is a process we all feel good about 

that guarantees access and the integrity and restores to the American people the confidence of our voting process. 

Mr. NEY. Thank you. 

[The statement of Ms. Coles James follows:] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
105 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 166 26272A.059
106 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 167 26272A.060
107 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 168 26272A.061
108 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 169 26272A.062
109 

Mr. NEY. Ms. Kaminski. 

STATEMENT OF ANDREA KAMINSKI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF WISCONSIN 

Ms. KAMINSKI. Thank you, Chairman Ney, for inviting me to appear before you. My name is Andrea Kaminski and I am executive 

director, League of Women Voters of Wisconsin. I brought copies of 

my testimony as requested and I submit them to the committee. 

Mr. NEY. Without objection. 

Ms. KAMINSKI. The Wisconsin league is proud of our state’s open 

and fair election process as well as our high voter turnout in the 

2004 election. We have no doubt that the two were related. 

Based on our long-standing principle that every citizen should be 

protected in the right to vote, we support legislation that improves 

accessibility and ease for voting for all eligible citizens and promotes voter confidence in the integrity of our election process. 

The League’s support of free and fair elections goes back to our 

founding in 1920. In the late 1970s, we supported the Wisconsin 

legislature’s enactment of major election reform including the establishment of registration at the polls and the definition of what 

kind of identification is needed for registration. 

We will continue to fight to protect citizens’ rights to participate 

in government and to oppose any major threats to our constitutional right to vote. 

We are not sure why the committee has come to Milwaukee to 

hold this hearing when Milwaukee’s 2004 election already has been 

heavily scrutinized by local, state, and federal agencies as well as 

by the media. 

The findings of these investigations show that virtually all of the 

discrepancies were the result of the inevitable incidence of human 

error on a hectic day. 

The League has opposed the efforts of several sessions in the 

Wisconsin legislature to require all citizens to show a government 

issued photo identification card in order to vote. Proponents of 

voter ID base their position on the assertion that it would reduce 

fraud and somehow keep felons from voting. 

The League agrees it is imperative to reduce fraud but voter ID 

does nothing to address the problem. It certainly would not have 

prevented the felons who voted in their own names from casting a 

ballot in Wisconsin last November. 

More important, the proposed Wisconsin voter ID bill places an 

unfair burden on certain groups of people including the elderly, low 

income, minorities, students, homeless and disabled, the very people for whom it is most difficult to take off work, get transportation, go to the DMV and wait in line, and apply for the documentation. 

At a hearing earlier this year, a disabled woman in Madison, 

where services are about as good as you are going to get in Wisconsin, described what she would have to go through to get to the 

DMV and get identification and it was a major undertaking. 

With all due respect, a photo ID is not definitive proof of address, 

nor does it tell us if someone is a felon who may not vote or, for 

that matter, a former felon whose voting rights have been restored. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
110 

The statewide registration lists that will be implemented in 2006 

will be a far more effective and fair tool for minimizing abuse of 

the system. So, voter ID would do nothing to protect the integrity 

of Wisconsin elections and it would restrict voting particularly by 

certain groups of people. That’s a net loss for democracy. 

In a recent report, the Wisconsin legislative audit bureau recommended that the state elections board use its existing authority 

to improve and enforce the election rules that ensure a smooth and 

fair election process. 

The bureau’s findings highlight the need for a more uniform system as well as adequate resources and requirements to implement 

existing rules and policies. The report says, quote, ‘‘the system 

alone will not be sufficient if municipal clerks and other local officials do not detect and prevent common data entry errors, appropriately revise and update voter registration and information, and 

follow uniform procedures for identifying improper registrars and 

ineligible voters,’’ end quote. 

Poll workers and election officials do a remarkable and vitally 

important job under great stress, but the system is failing them 

just as it is failing the voters. Let’s focus on the real problem at 

hand, the need for more resources for carrying out our elections. 

There are dozens of measures being reviewed by senator 

Leibham’s special committee here in Wisconsin that promise positive election reform. The League supports those that specifically 

improve accessibility and ease of voting for all eligible citizens. We 

heartily support measures that put more workers at the polls on 

election day and require uniform standards for the training of all 

poll workers and election officials. 

We strongly believe Congress should provide substantial new and 

ongoing funding for election improvements in the states. To sum 

up, last week in Georgia, U.S. District Judge Harold Murphy 

granted an injunction on a new voter ID law in that state knowing 

it would do nothing to address voter fraud. 

He said he had great respect for the Georgia legislature but he 

added ‘‘the Court, however, simply has more respect for the constitution,’’ end quote. 

Let’s not compromise anyone’s constitutional right to vote with a 

misguided attempt to fix a system that is not broken. Thank you. 

Mr. NEY. Thank you. 

[The statement of Ms. Kaminski follows:] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
111 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 175 26272A.063
112 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 176 26272A.064
113 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 177 26272A.065
114 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 178 26272A.066
115 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 179 26272A.067
116 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 180 26272A.068
117 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 181 26272A.069
118 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 182 26272A.070
119 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 183 26272A.071
120 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 184 26272A.072
121 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 185 26272A.073
122 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 186 26272A.074
123 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 187 26272A.075
124 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 188 26272A.076
125 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 189 26272A.077
126 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 190 26272A.078
127 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 191 26272A.079
128 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 192 26272A.080
129 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 193 26272A.081
130 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 194 26272A.082
131 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 195 26272A.083
132 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 196 26272A.084
133 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 197 26272A.085
134 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 198 26272A.086
135 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 199 26272A.087
136 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 200 26272A.088
137 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 201 26272A.089
138 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 202 26272A.090
139 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 203 26272A.091
140 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 204 26272A.092
141 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 205 26272A.093
142 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 206 26272A.094
143 

Mr. NEY. Mr. Erlanger. 

STATEMENT OF JEFF ERLANGER, COMMUNITY ACTIVIST 

Mr. ERLANGER. Thank you for the opportunity to come to speak. 

Today I am here—as you said I am a community activist. My specific things group that I am here to speak on behalf of are the disabled. 

I have served on the City of Madison committee people with disabilities and their ADA transit oversight subcommittee. 

My understanding is while the state proposal may require disabled people have to have voter ID, it is my understanding that the 

federal proposal actually exempts people with disabilities. First of 

all, am I correct about that. 

Mr. NEY. Well, the Help America Vote Act just requires the last 

four digits of your social security number. You can use a photo ID 

or you can use a bank slip statement. So it doesn’t—

Mr. ERLANGER. That’s for everybody. My comments will be a little different. 

Mr. NEY. I am sorry. The current law that we wrote the Help 

America Vote Act just requires either a photo, the last four digits 

of the Social Security number, bank slip, or water utility slip, for 

first time registrants only, not for existing voters. 

And so what you are talking about is Mr. Green’s act. 

Mr. ERLANGER. Right. 

Mr. NEY. As introduced. 

Mr. ERLANGER. Right. 

Mr. NEY. I am sorry. 

Mr. ERLANGER. So that’s what I am here for today. Instead of 

saying I am for or against it, I wanted to ask the committee some 

questions for you to think about. 

One is why would people with disabilities be exempt from Mark 

Green’s proposal? Is it because we might find it hard to get to the 

DMV to get our voter ID? Is it because we might not be able to 

pay for it? Or is it so that we can more on our own independently 

go and vote without having someone go into our wallet or something to get out a ID. 

In any case assuming it is for logistical purposes or for our economic purposes, I want to remind you all there are other people out 

there besides the disabled that have a hard time getting places. 

The poor may not have cars, they may have to work all day and 

not be able to make it to the polls to go vote, for whatever reason. 

Students may not be able to for the same reason be able to go 

and change their—and change their address every time they move. 

They might find it hard or have just moved to campus and find out 

in a week or 10 days that they have to—that there is an election 

so they have to come quickly and get their address changed. 

So I want to remind you that there are more people from disability that might find it hard to get there. 

I also want to remind people that not all people with disabilities 

are honest so just because we are disabled doesn’t mean that we 

might not go and commit fraud and as someone reminded me, that 

doesn’t stop someone from finding a wheelchair to just wheel into 

the polling place and say they are disabled so they don’t have to 

show a voter ID. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
144 

So I think if we are going to exempt people with disabilities we 

have to find a way to exempt other people who may be in similar 

situations. 

Also I believe that the voter ID should be free. If you are going 

to ask people to constantly go and get it updated and you are going 

to charge them, to me that is a poll tax. You might not call it a 

poll tax, well, you need the ID, you might find a way to spin it, 

if you are requiring them to pay for it in order to vote, it is a poll 

tax. 

I ran as I said in my written statement, I ran for city council in 

Madison in 2003 and 10 percent of the people in my district voted. 

Only 10 percent. I don’t think it is just because they were not impressed with me and my opponent who eventually won. 

In 2001 it was actually less than 10 percent who showed up to 

vote and I was not in the race so nothing to do with me. 

So I don’t think, while I am all for avoiding fraud, I don’t think 

our problem is trying to get people—is trying to stop people from 

voting. It is trying to get more people to vote, and to do that we 

need to not increase barriers but reduce the barriers. 

Mr. NEY. Thank you. 

Mr. ERLANGER. So I thank you for your time. 

[The statement of Mr. Erlanger follows:] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
145 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 211 26272A.095
146 

Mr. NEY. In response to your question, it is not my piece of legislation, but it is in the Committee. Just so you know, I have tended 

to not act upon a lot of the legislation until HAVA is completely 

implemented unless there is something that really stands out in 

2006 and that’s one of the reasons we are here today as an investigatory body—to learn what we can do or maybe can’t do, and certain things are going to have to be locally taken care of. 

I appreciate your testimony quite a lot. 

Mr. O’Neill. 

STATEMENT OF MATT O’NEILL, ATTORNEY, FRIEBERT, 

FINERTY & ST. JOHN 

Mr. O’NEILL. Thank you Chairman Ney, Congressman Ehlers, 

Congressman Moore, I appreciate the opportunity to address the 

committee today. 

I am an attorney in Milwaukee and last year 2004 I served as 

deputy state counsel for the Kerry Edwards’ campaign. 

In that capacity my primary job was to help train over 700 lawyers to observe the polls on election day and to help voters exercise 

their constitutional right to vote. 

Our primary focus when we trained our attorneys to work at the 

polls was to ensure that every eligible and qualified voter that 

showed up at a poll on election day was allowed to cast their ballot. 

We had our attorneys in the field fill out incident reports noting 

anything that happened on election day that appeared unusual, notable, interesting, anything that might be worth looking at later on 

after the election. We then analyzed those thousands of incidents 

that were reported by the attorneys, put together a report summarizing what we learned from our attorneys in the field, and I would 

like to—I don’t know if this had been submitted previously, but I 

would like to get that to the committee. 

Mr. NEY. Without objection it is part of the record. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
147 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 214 26272A.096
148 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 215 26272A.097
149 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 216 26272A.098
150 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 217 26272A.099
151 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 218 26272A.100
152 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 219 26272A.101
153 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 220 26272A.102
154 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 221 26272A.103
155 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 222 26272A.104
156 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 223 26272A.105
157 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 224 26272A.106
158 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 225 26272A.107
159 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 226 26272A.108
160 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 227 26272A.109
161 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 228 26272A.110
162 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 229 26272A.111
163 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 230 26272A.112
164 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 231 26272A.113
165 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 232 26272A.114
166 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 233 26272A.115
167 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 234 26272A.116
168 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 235 26272A.117
169 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 236 26272A.118
170 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 237 26272A.119
171 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 238 26272A.120
172 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 239 26272A.121
173 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 240 26272A.122
174 

Mr. O’NEILL. After looking at all the incident reports reflecting 

back with our experience with the election, there were four major 

problems with the election process in 2004 in Milwaukee. The first 

and major problem was simply the large turnout of 76 percent 

statewide, and Milwaukee was right in that ballpark, and frankly, 

that turnout simply overwhelmed the election volunteers that take 

care of our elections. Understand, every four years we have this 

massive turnout and in between there are elections that are nowhere near this size, and we do not increase with any amount that 

we need to the number of people working at those high turnout 

elections and they were overwhelmed with the tasks at hand. 

Second, we had problems in the City of Milwaukee specifically 

with the preelection registration process and that ended up with 

the City of Milwaukee having, I think, about eight boxes of unprocessed registration cards that were properly filled out, people believed that they were registered and yet we found out the day before the election that these eight boxes, that were not going to be 

at the polls and those individual people were not going to be on the 

local poll list. 

As a resident of Milwaukee, I personally sued the City of Milwaukee Elections Commission and the Commissioner, and I was 

able to work with a member of Mr. Millis’ firm and Kevin Kennedy 

with the Election Board that night before the election to hammer 

out a procedure by which those people, if they showed up, we actually were able to facilitate getting the physical registration cards 

to each of the polling places so they could check, I registered. You 

are not on the list they could check and find the cards. 

Another problem that was prevalent and came up primarily at 

the end of the day is with the absentee voting process in Wisconsin. 

There was testimony before about what needs to be changed, and 

we found at the end of the day there was mass confusion about 

how the absentee ballots were to be counted, how they were to be 

processed. 

On the envelopes a lot of people would write their address which 

was not the address at which they were registered, and where they 

addressed it was a problem finding them on the list. 

The fourth problem we found were Republican efforts to monitor 

the election ended up, in our view to be suppressive of the ability 

of people to vote for citizens of Milwaukee. 

I want to focus on that. 

The primary aspects we observed of the Republican efforts that 

ended up suppressing the vote in our opinion in very targeted 

wards in the City of Milwaukee and other urban areas and student 

areas, the Republicans placed at least one person directly behind 

the election officials and had them standing there with Palm Pilots 

or other kinds of Blackberrys and what they would do is look at 

the voters, and after they stated their names, they would punch 

them in and look them up and down. 

And I know that during the middle of election day, my wife 

called and said she felt intimidated when she faced that particular 

effort. I would like to submit also for the record one of our incident 

reports from an attorney Eric Straub who reports about some very, 

very aggressive observation efforts by an attorney from Michigan 

by the name of Perry Christy who is then joined by State Senator 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
175 

Tom Reynolds and I would like to submit that. It shows what was 

going on on the ground. 

Mr. NEY. Without objection. 

[The exhibit follows:] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
176 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 244 26272A.123
177 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 245 26272A.124
178 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 246 26272A.125
179 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 247 26272A.126
180 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 248 26272A.127
181 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 249 26272A.128
182 

Mr. O’NEILL. Part of the things that happened at all of these 

polling places were people walking around in these orange T-shirts 

that say I am a ‘‘HAVA Volunteer.’’ I know Chairman Ney might want to have a copy of this, but it 

is actually Mr. Kennedy’s particular shirt that he loaned to me. 

Mr. NEY. What was this? 

Mr. O’NEILL. This was a T-shirt, Individuals at the polling places 

that were wearing these ‘‘HAVA Volunteer’’ bright orange T-shirts, 

and we found out from our volunteers that these people were actually being paid to wear the T-shirts, and we found out that many 

of them knew very little about HAVA. With all due respect, HAVA 

in the last election had very little impact on Wisconsin. It was only 

those people who had mailed in their registration and were voting 

for the first time in a presidential election in Wisconsin that it had 

any impact on. 

Other problems we had were towards—Republican volunteers 

voting up and down the lines having interaction with voters talking 

about whether people were on the list or not, challenging the election authorities in the way they manage the business, using the 

challenge process. In sum I just wanted to bring to the Committee’s 

attention, there was another particular item that was very troublesome in the past election cycle here, and that was the efforts, and 

I know what I hear from my Republican colleagues that they were 

there trying to fair it out and prevent fraud, but I think they were 

very over aggressive and overzealous and I believe it suppressed 

the right of citizens of the City of Milwaukee to vote. 

Mr. NEY. Thank you. 

[The statement of Mr. O’Neill follows:] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
183 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 252 26272A.129
184 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 253 26272A.130
185 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 254 26272A.131
186 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 255 26272A.132
187 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 256 26272A.133
188 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 257 26272A.134
189 

STATEMENT OF DON MILLIS, ATTORNEY, MICHAEL, BEST, AND 

FRIEDRICH, LLP 

Mr. MILLIS. Mr. Chairman, members, thank you for this opportunity. I have never had the opportunity to testify before this committee before. However, I have testified before committees on which 

Representative Moore has sat, and I have enjoyed every experience 

and this will go just as smoothly. 

I am Attorney Don Millis and I am a lawyer in private practice 

in Madison, Wisconsin. For four years, I served on the State Elections Board. From time to time, I get involved in representing people in election-related disputes; don’t try to do it very often as it 

doesn’t pay very well. 

Wisconsin has a reputation for clean government. We also have 

a reputation for encouraging voter participation. We were among 

the first states to have primary elections and the open primary. We 

have election-day registration. I think those are all things we can 

be proud of. Those are the steps we’ve taken to promote voting in 

Wisconsin. 

Our clean reputation has taken it on the chin of late. There have 

been scandals involving politicians in Madison and what not and 

this is not good for anyone. I think as damaging as those have 

been, have been the accusations or the talk of voter fraud in the 

last three November elections. I think these are damaging to all of 

us, and I think there are two ways it hurts our democracy. 

The first is the obvious. It may actually have changed the results 

of some elections. If someone were to ask me do I think the results 

in any election would have changed, I would say I don’t think so. 

But the problem—the fact that I can’t say for sure—gets us to 

the second problem, that is the perception problem. There is a wide 

perception that things have not been on the up and up and may 

have caused problems. 

I think one of the most important things that a democratic government does is to conduct elections, and I think if we are going 

to, not only one, avoid the actual fraud and avoid change of election 

results and, two, enhance people’s confidence in the electoral result, 

we are going to have to take many steps. 

After the 2000 election, when I was still on the Elections Board, 

we started the ball rolling in a variety of ways. First, we started 

by outlawing punch-card ballots. No more hanging chads in Wisconsin. And we also had a series of proposals that some of us presented to the Elections Board that did not go very far. 

Statewide voter registration we would not have but for HAVA, 

but we also talked about photo IDs. It has become of the things we 

are talking about the most, but I think there are other things that 

should be considered. 

I think one of the things Mr. O’Neill mentioned is we have to 

have more machines in polling places, we have to accommodate 

large groups. I think we should strive for a national standard that 

no one should wait in line for more than 20 minutes to vote. Long 

lines do as much as anything to depress a voter turnout. But nevertheless we are here and photo IDs seem to be the thing that we 

are talking about. I guess I would like to make a few observations 

about this. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
190 

I think that there have been discussion about the fact that there 

were very few convictions, actual cases of proven voter fraud. There 

is a special prosecutor who is going to file a report in Washington 

and whether or not certain people are indicted or certain people are 

convicted, a certain segment of society is going to believe that certain administration officials were guilty. 

I don’t know whether they are guilty or not, but the fact is in 

the same way that the proof problems exist in any investigation, 

there are proof problems in conduct of elections. And the fact that 

a prosecutor cannot prove or be confident he or she can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that fraud existed, doesn’t mean fraud 

didn’t exist. 

But more importantly is the perception of fraud. There are some 

circumstances in which a photo ID would assist. A couple of people 

talked about the situation where someone shows up at polling place 

and discovers someone else voted or someone else may have been 

checked off the list as voting. I had a friend of my wife called a 

year ago and said, ‘‘I went to vote and they said I already voted 

and I had not voted.’’ She was persistent and she managed to convince the poll worker to let her vote which was the correct way. I 

did subsequently talk to some election officials and this happens 

actually more often than you might expect. 

Whether it is intentional—it’s probably not intentionally very 

often—but the fact that it occurs is an indication where a photo ID 

would assist. 

I think the greater impact of the photo ID would be the confidence that it would inspire in every person who participates in 

elections. If I know that I have to have a photo ID and the next 

person next in line and the next, I think that inspires confidence. 

I think it does have widespread support. There used to be a law 

in Wisconsin—it doesn’t exist anymore—but in these communities 

that were small enough to have polling lists, they didn’t have registration lists. You showed up. There was no list, you said, ‘‘ I am 

Don Millis. This is my street address.’’

In those municipalities, the poll worker had the ability to demand any person to present an ID with no objective criteria. You 

could have a situation where the person just thought you didn’t 

look like you belonged here. 

I don’t know how often it occurred. If people were discriminated 

against, it would certainly be inexcusable. 

I can tell you one thing, I don’t think we had any complaints during my time on the Elections Board about that and I think the reason is that generally poll workers try to do the best job they can 

and are not interested in depressing the vote. I think the idea of 

having to present an ID is something that people understand and 

are willing to do it. And I think the fact we have got wide acceptance of this indicates that I think we are ready to take that step. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify. 

[The statement of Mr. Millis follows:] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
191 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 263 26272A.135
192 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 264 26272A.136
193 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 265 26272A.137
194 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 266 26272A.138
195 

Mr. NEY. Thank you so much. I will give my slot to Mr. Ehlers 

since he has to leave. 

Mr. EHLERS. Thank you. I have to catch a plane because I have 

to give a speech back home which was scheduled before this. I appreciate the opportunity for this wrap up comment. 

I don’t have any specific questions for any of you. As I said before 

I am surprised to the extent the photo ID has been the center of 

the discussion, apparently not only here but in Wisconsin. I don’t 

regard that as the most overwhelming problem in elections. 

I also want to comment, I have been involved in holding hearings 

on elections in several places in the country from the West Coast 

to California to the East Coast of North Carolina and points between. 

Wisconsin had never been on my list of any area that had serious 

voting problems. I think by and large it is a good system and run 

well. I have been fairly critical in some of my comments here, but 

don’t take that personally. My hobby is to try to make sure all governments operate smoothly, I hate to see things go wrong, and I 

have a great deal of respect for the government in this country and 

I want it to work well. 

I really appreciate the comments that you have made and the 

other witnesses have made. It has given us a good handle on it, 

and I think you are well on the way to solving these problems. 

The one thing that really surprises me is the reasons given 

against the voter ID and I am especially surprised, Ms. Kaminski, 

that the League of Women Voters has bought into that. Most of 

those I have not heard before. I have never seen any substantiation 

of the charge that somehow a voter ID will discourage people from 

voting. I think it has been on the contrary as Ms. James has mentioned. It has been a positive influence on people and their knowledge that they have a definite ability to vote. 

Now, if they show up, they wouldn’t have an example such as 

Mr. Millis mentioned, you have already voted, voter ID would stop 

that. I think it would certainly be a much better thing over all, and 

I think people would be proud to have it. 

It should not cost anything, I agree with that, and as I said, my 

system which I proposed just off my head here, we have all of these 

electronic systems now, it would not be hard to have one person at 

each polling place doing the voter IDs right there. 

And there are machines now that print it right out, hand it to 

them, they walk out after having voted having their own personal 

voter ID, and I don’t think that in any way is intimidating and it 

shouldn’t be. 

Furthermore, if you do it in the voting place, you are likely to 

have an accurate record of the address as well and that gets away 

from the postcards, that gets out of being illegible. All done electronically. Good picture. Accurate address. What more can you ask 

for. 

I don’t think it will intimidate anyone or prevent them from voting. 

In terms of those who don’t have ready access to the polling place 

or vote absentee, that is another issue. I assure you that I could 

easily think of systems that would solve that as well and not at 

great cost either. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
196 

I think you ought to take voter ID issues off the table and concentrate on the clean up of the administrative problems that occurred here, and also if there are problems of intimidation. 

I sympathize with that because I heard reports of that in different cities, both sides of the aisle, intimidation is used, and certainly inappropriate in a polling place and there should be clear 

rules established as to what behavior is acceptable and what is not. 

I want to thank you for your hospitality. Milwaukee is a wonderful place, I enjoyed it very much. Wisconsin is a great place. After 

all they host the Oshkosh Air Venture every summer, and since I 

used to be a pilot and aspire to getting back into it if I ever retire, 

that’s another asset here. 

I can’t say much for the beer because I don’t drink beer, but it 

is a wonderful state and I have many fond memories of being here 

a number of ways. 

Keep it the way it is, keep it clean, correct the problems you had 

last time, and maybe you will go off everyone’s radar immediately 

in terms of any discussions of voter fraud. 

Thank you very much for your hospitality and what you are 

doing. 

Mr. NEY. Thank you. Ms. Moore. 

Ms. MOORE. Well, thank you so much Mr. Chairman, and again, 

this has been another distinguished panel, and I really appreciated 

the time that you have all taken to come here today. 

I am going to just make a statement and perhaps someone will 

want to respond. One of the—the real confusions I think that 

comes up with this whole voter ID thing is that people continue to 

say I don’t understand why people are not middle class. 

Why don’t they have—they need a photo ID to drive, they need 

a photo ID to ride an airplane, they need a photo ID to open a bank 

account, they need it to enroll in school to take a SAT, they need 

a photo ID to get cough syrup, and what the difference is in the 

ability to vote and the ability to take the SAT is that unfortunately 

education is not a constitutional right. It ought to be. Getting 

cough syrup ought to be a constitutional right, and it is not. 

We have a right to vote, so that means if you are too poor to have 

a car, guess what, you can still vote. 

If you don’t have two hours to sit up in the DMV to get a voter 

ID, you have a right to vote. Even if you can’t fly on an airplane 

to Naples, Florida, you have a right to vote. 

And even though you don’t have a right to food stamps where 

you might need a photograph ID, you have a right to vote. 

You don’t have a right to go to Blockbusters to get a video, but 

you have a right to vote. And the normative assumption that you 

ought to be middle class, why aren’t people just middle class. 

My granddaughter has a birthday tomorrow, and I gave my 

daughter some money to open up a bank account and they wouldn’t 

do it. She had a photo ID, but she didn’t have a credit card. She 

just wasn’t middle class enough to be able to do that. 

So poor people move often, poor people don’t, and I am telling 

you that we have data that part of the record I want everyone to 

really look at it, there is a very clear correlation between having 

a photo ID and being middle class, and that requirement would 

really, really, really, put a damp on people’s rights to vote. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
197 

I do appreciate Mr. Erlanger to come all the way from Madison, 

Wisconsin to give testimony and being an ally. He said why would 

you exempt disabled people who have tremendous challenges to be 

able to get the right to vote and those are just one source of challenges because you got the same challenge if you are elderly and 

you have not driven, you have the same challenge if you in fact are 

poor and you don’t have a car or if you have some other disability 

that is not necessarily a physical disability, but you are on great 

numbers of medication or whatever where you don’t drive. 

Clearly in the United States we have at least 50 million people 

who don’t vote, and I am really proud to be from Wisconsin, Congressman Ney, a state that values voter participation. We have the 

second highest turnout in the nation, and we ought to be looking 

to be examples of and models of how to increase the enfranchisement of people; not only in this country but as we export democracy to other countries as well instead of focussing on ways to frustrate the vote. 

The questions I guess I have of this panel again relate to what—

what you regard as the greatest impediment to voting. 

We have heard today about the numbers of errors, we have 

heard about fraudulent behavior, and I guess—I guess I want to 

refer to what just happened in Georgia where there is an injunction against enforcing the voter ID requirement because they have 

said that this violates the 24th amendment to the constitution. 

I want each one of you all to just quickly respond to those findings. 

Ms. COLES JAMES. First of all, I could not agree with you more, 

there should not be a disparity between poor people and middle 

class people where middle class people can move about the society 

because they do have ID, and I think ID ought to be provided to 

poor people as well and that is why they ought to remove all barriers to their ability to have that kind of identification, and that’s 

why this commission said it ought to be free. 

And as a matter of fact, we charged the states to go out and identify the people who do not have ID and see to it that they get it, 

so that no person in America needs to feel like a second class citizen because they don’t have access to ID. That’s one thing. 

And I—I really believe that having come at this from a various—

the Commission having come at it from various different positions 

and aisles, we all agreed on one thing and that is we wanted to 

protect the integrity of the process and to build confidence in the 

system. 

And I believe that voter ID has such strong widespread support 

it passes the straight face test because quite frankly it is not unreasonable of people to say if you present yourself at the polling 

place, it is reasonable to assume that the person standing there is 

in fact the person that is—that is on the list. 

And so requiring a voter ID seems to make sense to most Americans, and I believe it is—it is wrong, it is patently wrong that poor 

people, minorities, and other individuals who might not have access 

to ID feel like they are second class citizens, so we should do everything in our power to provide that to them and accommodate them 

in that process. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
198 

Ms. MOORE. I really actually thank you for raising the other 

point that I had forgotten to raise in your last statement, and that 

is not only should poor people not be disenfranchised in that way, 

you say that the—it will be free, that the card should be free, but 

we—we really don’t know how we would get these—get these cards 

to everyone. 

Ms. COLES JAMES. Well, there are ways to do that. 

Quite frankly, one of the reasons some of us support it the recommendation by the Commission is because we had serious problems with how it was being applied in an un-uniform way across 

America and had some concerns about how some states were implementing this. 

If in fact, as you said earlier, someone was going to be charged 

for a birth certificate and so it was sort of a hidden poll tax, there 

are ways that you can as a state make the determination that if 

someone is in fact trying to get a—a voter ID that they should not 

have to pay for that. 

Ms. MOORE. Would you do that at the expense of our state, same 

day registration. We had 77,000 people register on election day. We 

are really proud of that, and it seems to me a requirement for a 

photo ID just deliberately or inadvertently ends same day registration, and it does frustrate the ability of people to participate when 

you have an advance requirement because you want the photo ID 

to mean something so—do you not agree with same day registration. 

Ms. COLES JAMES. I think you are proud as well you should be 

and with technology as it exists today, that need not be a barrier. 

Ms. MOORE. I have got a son, for example, whose birthday is November 6th, he did not run into the problem November 6th is real 

close and sometimes falls on the first Tuesday. 

What would happen if my son had turned 18 on a presidential 

election day and didn’t have a voter ID card. 

Right now our law allows me as his parent to vouch for him and 

say he is in fact 18 years old even though he doesn’t have a driver’s 

license, and so I guess my concerns around voter ID is all of the 

preparation and middle classness that it really takes to have any 

kind of voter ID. 

You can’t have done what poor people do and that’s move four 

times a year. If this were a different hearing, would Milwaukee 

Public Schools here, they would tell you that the biggest problem 

that they have is the mobility of the students because they move 

four times during that year. 

So I—I really do want Chairman Ney to understand when we 

talk about imposing a photo ID requirement, we really are talking 

about a class issue, and I do thank you for that testimony. 

And I don’t know what the indulgence of the chair is going to be 

because I did invite other people to respond to Georgia’s——

Mr. MILLIS. With the indulgence——

Ms. MOORE. Yes. 

Mr. NEY. I have to add a caveat. If your son turned 18 and 

wasn’t able to register that day, and the democratic candidate lost 

by one vote for the presidency, it would be tough. 

Ms. MOORE. I will tell you, my son hounded me the day he 

turned 18 to go register to vote so we did not have that problem. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
199 

Mr. MILLIS. My first driver’s license photo was taken in a classroom in my high school. Back then in those days, this is decades 

before sad to say before digital photography, but that’s how they 

did it back then: The driver ed class came in. There is no reason 

today, as Congressman mentioned, why in the underserved areas, 

where we have lots of folks who don’t have photo IDs, that the Department of Transportation in Wisconsin which is under the legislation that has been pending here, they should go into communities, set it up, bring the camera, very portable, print them out 

right there. 

Ms. MOORE. That’s what they did in Georgia and there is an injunction against them, the guy in the mobile home, what if he 

doesn’t get to my rural setting? What if I am not at home when 

the mobile van comes through? You know—— Ms. COLES JAMES. Georgia had a lot of other issues. 

Ms. MOORE. Yes, including trying to suppress the vote of people 

of color and there is no question of the requirement of a state issue 

ID will have an impact on minorities. Whether that is the intent 

or not, that would be the effect. It disenfranchises the people of 

color. 

And if you are not home when that motor voter truck comes to 

your home, you won’t get your ID, and it will eliminate same day 

registration. 

Mr. O’NEILL. Very quickly with the Chair’s indulgence, you asked 

the question what the greatest barrier to voting is. Currently in the 

City of Milwaukee it is the amount of time it takes to vote in a 

presidential election because of the overwhelming turnout and 

understaffed polling places. 

The greatest asset conversely I believe is same day registration. 

I think that is the principle of Wisconsin’s steadfast right to protect 

as broadly as it can the right to exercise the constitutional right 

to vote. You asked also about the Georgia decision. I read that decision. It is very long and exhaustive and goes over a bunch of evidence. 

I think it is correctly reasoned and it comes down with two particular conclusions. The first is that it violates the right to vote because it places a barrier to voting that is not justified by what the 

state put forth as the need for voter ID. And I think one of the 

things everyone has to step back because everybody likes to yell 

fraud, really we have not gotten to a point, certainly not in Wisconsin, where there is a kind of overwhelming amount of evidence 

of a need for this kind of what anybody even in the report of the 

Commission, the Carter-Baker Commission acknowledges will place 

a barrier to some people exercising the right to vote. 

So I don’t think there is evidence to support voter ID. 

The second thing that that judge found that it is the equivalent 

of a poll tax. Regardless whether you say it is free, Georgia had a 

very strange affidavit requirement of indigency where they invited 

people to lie, but there is a constitution—24th amendment of the 

constitution says there shall not be a poll tax directly or indirectly 

and what the judge found was in order for someone to take the 

steps to get a license or a state ID who didn’t have one, it would 

cost them money, and that was equivalent of a poll tax, and I think 

that is a correctly decided decision. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
200 

Mr. ERLANGER. I would like to make a comment. Back to the 

question what is the biggest barrier being that I ran in a student 

district, I would say the biggest barrier is the lines. There is no 

reason it should need to take forever. 

I know in 1992 where I voted, it—the lines were two hours long. 

I got to cut halfway through because of the elevator I needed to 

take, took me halfway through the line, I was able to go by half 

as quickly as everyone else, but I think the lines are the biggest 

barrier. 

I think that it would be really horrible if we had to get rid of 

the same day recommendation. Out of the people who voted in the 

city council election I ran in, I would say probably a large majority 

maybe 90 percent of them were same day registrants. 

It was a student district, and they didn’t know. They thought 

they lived—since they were from Illinois that they were not allowed to vote in Wisconsin, and it took all through the election to 

convince—to get people to understand they were allowed to vote in 

Madison. 

The other barrier I would say is not everyone’s voting place is 

right near them. Mine is across the street. Some people’s are farther away. While Madison has a great pair of transit system and 

one of the only demand response taxi cabs in the country, most 

people—most cities don’t have that kind of situation, and for someone with—a person with disability to get to the voting place is very 

difficult. 

If you are going to have voter IDs, the only way to do it would 

be to take the picture in my view take the picture at the polling 

place and a computer that could check your address, and that 

would be a problem for poor people so I don’t think it is possible 

to do it. 

Ms. KAMINSKI. With the Chair’s indulgence, I would like to respond to something Congressman Ehlers said earlier. 

Mr. NEY. Yes. 

Ms. KAMINSKI. I want to say actually the Georgia League of 

Women Voters was very active in opposing the voter ID law and 

was one of the organizations that sued. 

If voter ID is to be a proof of address, then it is a problem for 

people who move often. My daughter is white, she is middle class, 

but she is 21 and she moves often, and that’s a problem for many 

of us. 

I agree that voter ID is really not the biggest problem here. It 

has been an emotional issue, but frankly we at the League wish 

it had died a couple of years ago the first time the governor vetoed 

it. 

The real problem is election management and the League of 

Women Voters believe we need to professionalize management with 

uniform standards, training to those standards, and accountability. 

We believe that there should be a service focus and that will deal 

with some of the other problems on election day. Voting should be 

convenient, efficient, and accessible. 

Mr. NEY. We are getting into statements. If you want to answer 

the question, we can still go over your statements, there are answers to her——


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
201 

Ms. MOORE. Yes, as it relates to the Georgia law and particularly 

given the Georgia injunction, how do you see problems surfacing 

were we to implement photo ID. 

Ms. KAMINSKI. How do I see problems with regard to implementing. 

Ms. MOORE. Continue saying—I am asking you what you are 

talking about. 

Mr. NEY. Otherwise people would ask for statements not discussed. 

Ms. KAMINSKI. We believe that voter ID is not proof of address 

and it is a problem for those who move often and it is a problem 

for many people. The real problem with elections is with management. We believe we need to have more professional uniform standards and then funding to support their implementation. Thank you. 

Mr. NEY. Let me just ask a couple of questions and then wrap 

it up unless she has other questions. 

I want to ask a question of Ms. Coles James. I was a bit surprised when I saw the recommendation out of Carter-Baker on 

some areas and not on others. 

With the Ford-Carter Commission, I think one of the thrills of 

my lifetime, I had back to back phone calls with President Carter 

and President Ford after we passed HAVA and the Ford-Carter 

Commission was huge, monumental in helping with HAVA to create that piece of legislation, and some things they recommended we 

took and some we didn’t. 

It was a little easier with some of the recommendations, as we 

were embarking on a brand new area, the first federal involvement 

in elections without federalizing. 

And of course I served with Lee Hamilton—I don’t think you 

could find a fairer person—and Andrew Young. Looking at the controversy about the photo ID coming out of Carter-Baker, was there 

concern or were there discussions during the whole deliberations to 

create the final report about the disenfranchisement of individuals 

and particular minorities. 

Ms. COLES JAMES. Yes, there was a great deal of discussion 

about that both in formal discussions during the Commission as 

well as informal discussions outside of the actual formal deliberations. 

And I think one thing needs to be said for clarification. We tend 

to talk about photo ID as though there is one way to do it, and I 

think we need to clarify that. 

There are many who supported the recommendation of the 

Carter-Baker Commission because they didn’t like the way it was 

being done in Georgia, so you can’t—you can’t line up the CarterBaker recommendation with Georgia and say they are the same, 

therefore, all recommendations for photo ID are bad. It requires a 

little bit more thought than that. 

And so I think that point needs to be made. The discussions 

about disenfranchisement were very thoughtful and very deliberative, and the individuals who ended up voting in favor of this particular recommendation did so because they were convinced that 

with proper safeguards and those that you will see discussed in the 

full commission report in place that it would not—it would result 

in minorities or poor people being disenfranchised, but you have 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
202 

to—you have to take the full piece which says that they—we 

should make every effort to make sure that states do not have any 

kind of overt or covert poll tax, to make sure that it is accessible, 

to make sure that states actually go out and in an aggressive way 

try to identify individuals who don’t have ID and see to it that it 

does get into their hands. 

We are not talking about a van that you may miss because it 

doesn’t come to your neighborhood. We are talking about opening 

up lots of places around a state where someone would have access 

to get this done. Quite frankly the way they are doing in it in Georgia where they have multiple counties and very few opportunities 

to have a picture taken is in my opinion not the way to get it done. 

So we had those discussions, we talked about it, and at the end 

of the day, the overwhelming majority of the commissioners felt 

that to build confidence in U.S. Election, to have American people 

feel good at the end of the day about the process, that it is not unreasonable to say that the person presenting themselves at the 

polling place in fact is the person whose name is on that registration list. 

Mr. NEY. Thank you. I just have one comment, Mr. Erlanger. 

One—one of the problems you have got and I am not saying same 

day registration is bad or good or wrong or right. 

I’m not stating a position on this, but if you have same day registration you come up with the surprise factor. Same day registration last election yielded 70,000 or 76,000 new people. Maybe next 

election 20,000, who knows? I think some of the reasons you would 

have long lines is because you don’t have the ability to anticipate 

how many people are registered prior to election. 

I think the long lines are going to have to be addressed whether 

you have the same data or not. It was an issue in Ohio; we had 

an unusual type of election. I think inherently you are going to 

have a lot of local pressure. If you have long lines, they are going 

to call their Mayor, Congressman, and a lot of people and start to 

yell about those long lines. 

I know it happened in Columbus, Ohio—we had longer lines than 

where I live in the eastern part of the state. 

Mr. ERLANGER. I think it is a barrier. I don’t think there is necessarily something that can be done. It is a barrier. 

Mr. NEY. Yes. 

Mr. ERLANGER. You have to admit it is a barrier and there might 

be things that can be done creative things, but I think that is up 

to—that may be something the federal government can do. I don’t 

know. It is a barrier. 

Mr. NEY. I think the locals probably will after one of the highest 

voter turnouts in the history of the country. Interesting, on another 

note I wanted to ask Mr. O’Neill—on the intimidation factor—you 

said people were standing behind the pollworkers during the vote. 

Mr. O’NEILL. Correct. The way voting happens if you are registered——

Mr. NEY. In the state of Ohio, you can’t stand behind. 

Mr. O’NEILL. We have open observation rules that don’t specify— they allow observers to stand close enough that they can see and 

hear what happens at the table, both the registration table and the 

table where the poll lists are. That is what the law is. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
203 

Mr. NEY. Observers. 

Mr. O’NEILL. Stationed directly behind. Sometimes the election 

officials told them to move it over to the side. Sometimes they 

didn’t. 

But we got a lot of reports that’s exactly where they were stationing themselves earlier in the day. 

Mr. NEY. We have observers too; maybe you do it differently 

here. 

In our state I have my original congressional district that I 

served before we recarved four years ago. It has an 11 percent Republican index. More Republicans, 11 percent had a very, very historically Democratic district. 

When I first ran in 1994, I had a primary on the Republican side. 

I am a Republican, and I had a primary and a lot of people became 

alarmed because we were taking 69 percent of union households. 

I had been a state senator, but some people within the democratic 

party became so alarmed because I got into a primary that democrats would switch in mass my home county. I took it from 11 percent to 13 percent. I’m bragging about one election where it went 

up—but there were things going on where people walk up to the 

poll and say, ‘‘I would like a Republican ballot,’’ and someone would 

immediately want to challenge that. You can challenge in Ohio. 

I don’t think those things should be done. I don’t know if we can 

correct that federally which comes to your point. 

We are trying to look at how HAVA is being implemented and 

whether we can correct it. I complained in my own state. I don’t 

think you should say you want a Democratic or Republican ballot. 

Maybe you should say who you voted for in the last election. 

Those are factors that are here and there. Why Ohio does that, 

I don’t know. If you want a democrat or republican ballot, it should 

be given to you without having to say whether or not you voted for 

that party in the last election? It makes people nervous, I have 

seen it in a different way in my elections. 

Mr. O’NEILL. We are an open primary state. You can pick whichever party you want to vote for. It is a single ballot vote, you can’t 

only vote for one party so we do have open challenge procedures. 

Mr. NEY. We are open. You can walk in and you can be a democrat in one election, and you can change in the primary, but you 

are allowed to be questioned. Your switch is allowed to be questioned at the local level, and I don’t know if we should cure that, 

and some of the things you address, at the federal level, I don’t 

know if we should cure it federally or if people should have to move 

out behind a point of flags. 

I think it is something to look at. 

Mr. O’NEILL. I don’t know that there is a federal solution. I 

wanted to bring it to the attention——

Mr. NEY. We appreciate that and down the road we will look at 

doing some things at the federal level. 

I am going to close with a couple of questions. I wanted to ask 

Ms. Kaminski—when you question why we came here—we came 

here because we have been to Ohio and we will go to other states. 

Mr. Green wanted us to come here. 

He has a bill pending in the Committee I chair, which we have 

not made a decision on as a committee. But it is worth its ID and 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
204 

now it has been discussed by Baker-Carter, so we came here to listen, and, as you know, we have come here as an investigatory body, 

but we did come here to listen. I think the more flavor we get from 

Members and states that experienced controversy benefits us. 

A reporter said we just created a great bill on persons that have 

disability issues and asked why it wasn’t reported. He said we 

don’t report when the plane lands, we report when it crashes. So 

in states that have had controversy, that’s why we went to Ohio 

and talk about going to Florida. That’s why we have come here. 

I do have a question to ask you. The League has expressed its 

concern about the voting practices in Ohio and our League of Women’s Voters filed a lawsuit after the election due to the controversy 

of the election. 

Did the League of Women’s Voters ever consider filing a lawsuit 

here in Wisconsin? Your counterparts did in Ohio. 

Ms. KAMINSKI. No. Our legislative committee and our board have 

not discussed that. That has not been a question for us. 

Mr. NEY. Why do you think they filed in Ohio? Did you ever 

hear. 

Ms. KAMINSKI. I honestly can’t answer the question. I would have 

to find out from the Ohio League and then I could send that to 

your office. 

Mr. NEY. I was curious. I don’t know if it mattered who won or 

lost the election or whether the lawsuit——

Ms. KAMINSKI. No. 

Mr. NEY. I should not ask the trick question, have you ever disagreed with the Democratic party on election reform. 

Ms. KAMINSKI. Yes we have. 

Mr. NEY. That was a trick question. I told you in advance it was 

a trick question. In Ohio we had a lot of controversy and there was 

a lawsuit that was filed due to the nature of the election which was 

not as close as Wisconsin. 

I appreciate all of your comments and your thoughts today. 

I want to thank my colleague, general lady, down there working 

with issues, the other members, and Mr. Green for inviting us. 

This is something that is worth it and very healthy for the process and something we can take back to Washington. 

And on behalf of our Ranking Member, the great gentle lady 

from California, I want to thank all of you for being here today 

with us. 

I ask unanimous consent that members and witnesses have 

seven legislative days to submit materials for the record and for 

the statements and materials to be entered in the appropriate 

place in the record. Without objection, the material will be entered. 

I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make technical and conforming changes on all matters considered by the 

Committee at today’s hearing. 

Without objection, so ordered. That will complete our business for 

today. The hearing committee is hereby adjourned. We appreciate 

the hospitality and friendliness of Milwaukee. Thank you. 

[Whereupon, the committee was adjourned.] 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
205 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 292 26272A.139
206 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 293 26272A.140
207 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 294 26272A.141
208 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 295 26272A.142
209 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 296 26272A.143
210 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 297 26272A.144
211 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 298 26272A.145
212 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 299 26272A.146
213 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 300 26272A.147
214 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 301 26272A.148
215 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 302 26272A.149
216 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 303 26272A.150
217 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 304 26272A.151
218 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 305 26272A.152
219 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 306 26272A.153
220 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 307 26272A.154
221 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 308 26272A.155
222 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 309 26272A.156
223 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 310 26272A.157
224 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 311 26272A.158
225 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 312 26272A.159
226 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 313 26272A.160
227 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 314 26272A.161
228 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 315 26272A.162
229 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 316 26272A.163
230 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 317 26272A.164
231 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 318 26272A.165
232 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 319 26272A.166
233 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 320 26272A.167
234 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 321 26272A.168
235 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 322 26272A.169
236 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 323 26272A.170
237 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 324 26272A.171
238 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 325 26272A.172
239 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 326 26272A.173
240 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 327 26272A.174
241 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 328 26272A.175
242 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 329 26272A.176
243 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 330 26272A.177
244 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 331 26272A.178
245 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 332 26272A.179
246 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 333 26272A.180
247 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 334 26272A.181
248 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 335 26272A.182
249 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 336 26272A.183
250 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 337 26272A.184
251 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 338 26272A.185
252 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 339 26272A.186
253 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 340 26272A.187
254 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 341 26272A.188
255 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 342 26272A.189
256 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 343 26272A.190
257 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 344 26272A.191
258 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 345 26272A.192
259 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 346 26272A.193
260 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 347 26272A.194
261 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 348 26272A.195
262 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 349 26272A.196
263 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 350 26272A.197
264 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 351 26272A.198
265 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 352 26272A.199
266 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 353/500 26272A.200