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

30–169 2006

HEARING ON SECURING THE VOTE: NEW MEXICO 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE 

ADMINISTRATION 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

HEARING HELD IN LAS CRUCES, NM, AUGUST 3, 2006 

Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration 

( 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION 

VERNON EHLERS, Chairman 

ROBERT W. NEY, Ohio 

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 

WILL PLASTER, Staff Director 

GEORGE SHEVLIN, Minority Staff Director 

(1) 

SECURING THE VOTE: NEW MEXICO 

THURSDAY, AUGUST 3, 2006 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION, 

Washington, DC. 

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

Medical Center, Conference Room A and B, 2450 Telshor Boulevard, Las Cruces, New Mexico, Hon. Vernon J. Ehlers (chairman 

of the committee) presiding. 

Present: Representatives Ehlers and Lofgren. 

Also Present: Representative Pearce. 

Staff Present: Peter T. Sloan, Professional Staff. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Committee will come to order. 

I’m very pleased to be in Las Cruces. I hate to admit it, this is 

my first time here. And I have been in New Mexico many times, 

but never in this corner. 

I have to admit I was surprised to find it 20 degrees cooler than 

my home state of Michigan. It’s usually the other way around. But 

we are having a heat wave, and you’re having cool weather and 

rain. 

First of all, I would like to ask all members of our audience here 

today to please silence all cellular phones, pagers, other electronic 

equipment to prevent interruption of the hearing. It is very disconcerting for a witness, who is terrified to be in front of terrible 

people like me, to suddenly have a phone ringing behind them. So 

please turn off all your electronic equipment. Thank you very 

much. 

Also, a few housekeeping items we need to attend to before the 

beginning of the hearing. Due to strict time limits, the Chair will 

be enforcing the five-minute rule for timing of both witnesses and 

members. This means that witnesses are limited to a five-minute 

time frame for their presentation, and that members, when they 

ask questions, will be limited to a five-minute time frame for questioning. 

Without our usual timing machines available to indicate when 

the five-minute time frame has elapsed—you see, in the Congress, 

we have lights that go off and trapdoors that open up if we speak 

too long. We don’t have that here, so I will simply tap my gavel 

on the block once to indicate that four minutes is up. And then, at 

five minutes, I’ll remind you again. And I will do the same with 

member questions as well. And I ask everyone to try to be brief 

when answering questions of members. 

There are a number of witnesses here, and we have three members of Congress here who will be asking questions. So we’d like 

2 

to give everyone an opportunity to say everything they want to say 

or ask everything they want to ask. 

I’m very pleased to introduce the other members of the panel. By 

the way, I’m Vernon Ehlers from Michigan. I’m Chair of the Committee on House Administration. 

And to my left is Ms. Zoe Lofgren from the San Francisco Bay 

area—the southern Bay area, a very valued member of the committee, also an attorney, which is always helpful to us. 

And to my right, a member of the House of Representatives from 

the wonderful State of New Mexico, Steve Pearce. We’re in his territory. He was good enough to join us. 

And I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from New 

Mexico, Representative Steven Pearce, be allowed to join us on the 

dais today, that he may be able to ask questions of the witnesses, 

enter a statement into the record, and preside for brief occasions 

if the Chair has to leave. Without objection, so ordered. 

We just have to go through that formality to welcome him and 

give him the privilege of speaking and asking questions. 

The committee is very pleased to be here today in Las Cruces for 

a field hearing on securing the vote. Today the committee will be 

looking into the issues raised by identification requirements and 

voting by non-citizens in federal elections. 

New Mexico has been grappling with these issues at the state 

level. And I thought, personally, that you would probably know a 

great deal about this and could be very helpful to us. So the committee hopes to gain some insight and perspective today by hearing 

from people who have been dealing with these issues firsthand. In 

short, we want to learn from you. 

My goal is very simple: To ensure that every citizen’s vote in this 

nation will be accurately counted, and that everyone who wishes to 

vote will be allowed to vote, and that his or her vote will not be 

diluted by illegal votes or fraudulent miscounting of votes. 

Those who doubt that every vote matters need only look to New 

Mexico. The margins of victory in this state in each of the last two 

presidential elections show the importance of every single vote. 

In the election of 2000, Presidential Candidate Al Gore won the 

popular vote in New Mexico by just 365 votes out of almost 600,000 

cast. Incidentally, the margin in Florida that year was 537, a more 

populous state. In 2004, President Bush won the popular vote in 

New Mexico by a slightly larger margin of 5,988 votes out of 

756,000 cast. 

These slim margins of victory highlight the importance of ensuring that every vote cast in an election is a valid one, cast by an 

eligible citizen and accurately recorded. While there may be disagreement over the scope and magnitude of voting errors and 

fraud, these numbers clearly demonstrate that when the margins 

are this close, even a small amount of fraud or error can sway an 

election. 

New Mexico has dealt with many election reforms, including 

identification requirements. While New Mexico’s state legislature 

has passed an ID bill, debate continues in the state about the sufficiency and effectiveness of this law and whether or not it provides 

adequate protections to ensure electoral integrity. Elections are too 

important to be operated on an honor system. We cannot rely upon 

3 

the honor of those among us who are inclined to commit fraud. We 

must ensure that we have procedures in place that protect the 

franchise. 

It has often been said that the purpose of the Help America Vote 

Act, better known as HAVA, was to make it easier to vote and 

harder to cheat. The election that will occur in November will be 

the first national election to occur with all the requirements of 

HAVA in place. Today’s hearing will give us an opportunity to hear 

more about what is being done in the states to protect the franchise. And we do plan to carry this hearing to a number of different 

states so we can learn from a number of different localities. 

I certainly look forward to getting some outside-the-beltway perspective on these issues. And I’m sure you’ve all heard about the 

problems inside the beltway. 

I thank all of our witnesses for coming. I look forward to their 

testimony. 

[The information follows:] 

4 


Insert graphic folio 9 30169A.001
5 


Insert graphic folio 10 30169A.002
6 


Insert graphic folio 11 30169A.003
7 

The CHAIRMAN. At this time, I would like to recognize my fellow 

committee member, Ms. Zoe Lofgren, for any opening remarks she 

may have. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And as with you, I thank the people of Las Cruces for their hospitality. This is also my first time for being in Las Cruces, and it’s 

a lovely place. I will say that with gas at $3.46 a gallon the last time I filled 

up, and with Israel and Hezbollah in a terrific fight that threatens 

the peace and the stability of the world, with the situation in Iraq 

unabated, and the Secretary of Defense on the hot seat right now 

before the Senate Armed Services Committee, it does seem that 

this is not the most important issue that faces our nation today. 

However, I came here today to make sure that there was full attendance from the committee. I do believe with this, the first hearing that we’ve had on this subject, and the hearing that we held 

in Washington provided almost no evidence that people who are 

here illegally are voting, but it did provide substantial evidence 

that individuals who might be asked to prove with a photo ID that 

they were citizens would disproportionately—Americans would disproportionately be disadvantaged. 

And in fact, the evidence that we received in our hearing in 

Washington indicated that those who would be most disadvantaged 

by the photo ID requirement, American citizens, would be AfricanAmericans. And in fact, there was a study done in Milwaukee—I 

was astounded by this result, but when you think about it, it 

makes sense—that among African-American men, age 18 to 24, 78 

percent of those young men, American citizens, did not have a driver’s license or other photo ID. Why? Because they didn’t have any 

money, and they didn’t have a car. 

And so the HAVA act was meant to put some order in the system, but the real effort was to make sure that Americans had an 

opportunity to fully vote and participate in elections. Everybody 

knows that only Americans are allowed to vote. There is no dispute 

on that. So any effort that would go after kind of a phantom problem, and in the process, disadvantage large numbers of Americans 

who want to be able to vote would be the wrong—the wrong approach, in my judgment. 

Now, I—as the Chairman knows, I have a great deal of respect 

for Chairman Ehlers. We’ve served together not only on this committee and on the Science Committee, so this comment does not relate to him but to his party. This hearing is really part of a pattern 

throughout this recess, and I think it’s important to put this into 

context. There are, as I counted, 27 so-called field hearings on immigration being held by various committees around the country. 

Appropriations, Armed Services, Education, Workforce, Government Reform, Homeland Security, the Intelligence Committee, the 

International Relations Committee, the Judiciary Committee, the 

Science Committee, the Ways and Means Committee, all are out 

holding hearings on immigration. And I think it’s pretty clear that 

it’s an effort to try and stir up an issue for political ends, and I 

think that that is unfortunate. 

I will say that I will listen very carefully to all the testimony. I’m 

very honored that people took the time and made the effort to be 

8 

here. The fact that this is a politicized effort is not the problem of 

the witnesses who have taken their time to be here, but I do think 

that that is what the game plan is for the party. And I’m here really to call attention to that fact and also to fully participate. 

So thank you, Mr. Chairman, for recognizing me for my statement. I look forward to further questions of the witnesses. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you for your comments. 

One thing I neglected to announce, we do not permit applause. 

Occasional laughter, maybe, if you have a reason for it, but no applause or other demonstrations. We like to maintain a decorum in 

the committee. 

Next, I’m pleased to welcome your Representative Steven Pearce 

to make his opening statement. 

Mr. PEARCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to 

visit and be a part of this panel. I don’t normally sit on the committee, and so it’s only with the consent of all members that I sit 

here. So I appreciate that and welcome you to the district, you and 

Ms. Lofgren. I would just kindly request that before you leave 

town, you spend lots of money. 

We—you are being treated to an unusual sight in New Mexico, 

and that’s rain. Yesterday, I had a constituent saying, We’re always praying for rain. Now we probably need to pray for it to stop. 

And I would just like to caution my constituents, last time we 

prayed for it stop, it quit for 12 years. So let’s ask that it slow 

down a bit. 

But we are dealing with the water quite well in most circumstances and help is going to different districts. 

We are joined today by Suzie Cordero from Senator Domenici’s 

office. I saw Representative Mary Helen Garcia, who I went to the 

legislature with at my freshman year. We were both freshmen together. Served on the Appropriations Committee—ah, right here in 

the front row—a great public servant. 

Representative Joseph Cervantes is somewhere in the audience, 

way in the back. We appreciate you coming out today. Another fine 

representative. 

And Bishop Ricardo Ramirez is here this morning. I got a letter 

from him when I voted against the bill that our office almost completely crafted. We did about 75 percent of the work on the House 

Immigration Bill, and then certain pieces of it were added on the 

floor which we felt like extended it too far, and voted against that. 

We appreciate that letter of support. 

Beginning right after the 2002 election, we submitted information to the House of Representatives about fraud that was occurring in the election process where I was elected. In fact, everyone 

in this county knows that the county clerk from that point—from 

that period of time of 2002, Ruben Ceballos, was actually indicted 

on more than 10 counts of voter fraud and eventually convicted of 

that. 

And so I think, Mr. Ehlers, that I’m glad you’re here talking 

about the broader aspect of voter reform. 

As it eases up to the question of illegals voting, I would just urge 

caution because 47 percent of the members of this district are Hispanic, and I would hate for the attempt to find the illegals voting 

would cross across the line and begin to just identify randomly, beVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:15 Oct 28, 2006 Jkt 030169 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A169.XXX A169
9 

cause many people have been here longer than my family—Hispanic residents, they have been here longer than my family. And 

I would urge caution at that point. 

But I appreciate the fact that you’re here. 

The immigration issue does not need stirring up. It’s been about 

as hot and as volatile as any issue that we have. And so if it takes 

27 field hearings to—to really get closer to the truth, I think we 

should take the time to get closer to the truth; that we should 

know when we pass legislation in Congress, that it is actually reflective of the will of the people. 

And so I appreciate the fact that you’re here, the fact that you’re 

taking the testimony of people from New Mexico, because I think 

that—that it’s one of the most important issues. If we, as American 

people, lose confidence in the voting system and in our right to vote 

and in the sacredness of our vote, we will go a long ways to undermining the democracy and the freedom that we’re fighting for in 

other countries at this particular time. 

So I look forward to the testimony today, and we look forward 

to being able to question witnesses. 

I thank again the Chairman for his indulgence to sit on the committee. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much and I appreciate your 

presence. 

I also want to mention that we have a representative from Senator Domenici’s office here as well, and I appreciate that. I’ve 

worked with Senator Domenici on a number of issues. We are both 

interested in science—I’m a scientist. He sits on committees that 

deal with science, and we have been able to collaborate on some 

important issues, and he’s a very fine senator. I’m pleased you sent 

him to Washington. 

I’d also like to clarify a point which was made by Mr. Pearce, and 

that is, this not a hearing devoted to talking about illegal immigrants. I’ve been on the House Administration Committee, which is 

responsible for election issues, been on that committee for quite a 

few years now. And it was astounding to me—because I always assumed Americans were honest, they would vote honestly and so 

forth, I was just astounded at the number of illegal votes that get 

cast. I remember particularly an election in North Carolina which 

we had to oversee, and the fraud that was there was just incredible. 

So don’t misunderstand the purpose of the hearing. I am opposed 

to all illegal voting. I’m also very strongly in favor of everyone voting who wishes to vote and is legally entitled to do that. 

I would like to welcome our first and only panel of the day. We 

have with us the Representative Justine Fox-Young of the New 

Mexico House of Representatives; Vickie Perea, a former member 

of the Albuquerque City Council; Daniel Bryant, an attorney; Jennifer Hensley, an advocate with the New Mexico Protection and 

Advocacy System, Incorporated; Kimmeth Yazzi, the program and 

project specialist with the Navajo Election Administration; and 

Kathleen Walker—I’m sorry, there you are—partner at Kemp 

Smith. Welcome all, and we look forward to your testimony. 

All right. It’s my pleasure today to introduce Representative FoxYoung. And you have five minutes for your testimony. 

10 

STATEMENT OF JUSTINE FOX-YOUNG, NEW MEXICO STATE 

REPRESENTATIVE, HOUSE DISTRICT 30 

Ms. FOX-YOUNG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. Thank you for the invitation to testify today. We are happy 

to have you in New Mexico. 

My name is Justine Fox-Young. I serve in the New Mexico House 

of Representatives, in District 30 in Albuquerque. 

I drove down this morning. We do a lot of driving in New Mexico. 

It’s a big state, and there’s a lot of country to cover. But I drove 

down, and I was reminded of the—what are here famous words, of 

Lou Wallace, who was the territorial governor from 1878 to 1881, 

who said that ‘‘All calculations based on our experiences elsewhere 

fail in New Mexico.’’ 

This is—as I came into first light coming into Truth or Consequences, New Mexico, and a parasailer came over the highway 

about 50 feet above me and kind of cruised on, just coasting over. 

Shortly after that, a light rain started, which turned to driving 

rain. And then coming into Cruces, the sky opened, the light came 

down, and it was just absolutely lovely, as it often is here. 

But I just think it’s important—and as the committee is acutely 

aware, each state is different, and we all have our preferences as 

elections are concerned. New Mexico certainly has its idiosyncrasies, but it’s important to note that our local election officials do an 

extraordinary job with the resources that they have. 

I, personally, in state legislature, have carried a number of election reform bills covering voter ID, provisional ballots, counting 

procedures, voting machine testing procedures and others. And I 

think there are few issues more important than ensuring free and 

fair elections in New Mexico. So I’m here today because of my concern for the election process here. 

On the issue of illegal immigrants voting here, it’s extremely difficult to quantify the problem because we have no database. Although I know that many federal and state agencies have the components to do it, we have no data available to local officials to validate citizenship and—alongside voter registration polls. So I think 

it’s very clear, based upon all the evidence from the 2000 election 

and 2004 election and others that the potential for fraud exists 

here as it relates to illegal immigrants, but it’s difficult to quantify. 

I’d just say that in the months leading up to the general election 

in 2004, there were over 150,000 new registrants in New Mexico. 

There are significant incentives for 527 groups and their agents to 

register new registrants all over the country. Here, we finally 

reached the million mark in 2004 with over a 15 percent increase 

in registrants. And in Bernalillo County alone, there were over 

3,000 registrations caught, so to speak, by the Bernalillo County 

Clerk. 

And I’ve included examples here. I won’t go through all of them. 

However, if you look at Exhibit A briefly, the sorts of things that 

we’ve seen here aren’t, I’m sure, terribly different from what you 

see in other states, but numerous duplicate registrations at single 

addresses, 13- and 15-year-olds registered to vote. 

There is a letter, in Exhibit A, from an individual, Mr. James 

Dickey from Tucson, Arizona, who received a voter registration 

card here in New Mexico despite the fact that he had not been a 

11 

New Mexico resident for over nine years. He had to petition to be 

removed from the voter roster. This is not unusual. In fact, as I 

said, you know, we have seen thousands and thousands of these 

and continue to do so. 

Exhibit B includes examples from the 2000 election that are very 

similar. Instances where individuals who appear to be deceased 

here in Dona Ana County, for whom obituaries ran, were present 

on the 2000 voter roster and voted. Clear—clear indicators that 

there is a problem. Not necessarily an absolute. But our state election officials have not, to my mind, adequately addressed some of 

these issues. 

In each case where we find what appears to be fraudulent—and 

some fraudulent registration and fraudulent voting, there is no systematic method for detecting this. Even after HAVA, even after the 

election reforms that we’ve put in place here, even after the very 

loose sort of voter IDs that the legislature passed in the last election, sometimes, you know, through a fortuitous sequence of events, 

we find things. More often than that, we don’t. 

And so I’m in no position to produce a credible figure of the number of fraudulent votes that there may be and certainly of the number of illegal immigrants who are registered to vote. However, I can 

tell you that in New Mexico over—now, like over 30,000 individuals 

who are illegal immigrants have received driver’s licenses, and 

every single one of them is asked whether or not they would like 

to register to vote as part of the Motor Voter Act. And so there— 

there are likely huge numbers who did subsequently register. We 

have anecdotal information that this committee has seen on that 

issue. 

On the general issue of voter ID, it’s reasonable to assume that 

the individuals, the population who are perhaps most suspicious of 

the voting process here and anywhere else are new registrants. In 

2004, a national polling firm conducted a poll of 500 new registrants, and that is attached—the key findings of that poll are attached as Exhibit C in my testimony—and found that 99 percent 

of those folks, if asked to produce some form of ID, would be happy 

to, that it wasn’t an overly burdensome request and it wouldn’t 

prevent them from voting. So a summary of key findings is there. 

But the second important development on this issue, the general 

voter identification in New Mexico, the city of Albuquerque recently 

enacted a new ordinance, which is a strict voter ID ordinance— 

photo voter ID. And unlike some other areas, we did provide free 

ID for these folks and that has worked beautifully and worked 

beautifully in the last general election. 

Is that five minutes? 

The CHAIRMAN. Yes. 

Ms. FOX-YOUNG. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much for your testimony. 

[The statement of Ms. Fox-Young follows:] 

12 


Insert graphic folio 026 30169A.004
13 


Insert graphic folio 027 30169A.005
14 


Insert graphic folio 028 30169A.006
15 


Insert graphic folio 029 30169A.007
16 


Insert graphic folio 030 30169A.008
17 


Insert graphic folio 031 30169A.009
18 


Insert graphic folio 032 30169A.010
19 


Insert graphic folio 033 30169A.011
20 


Insert graphic folio 034 30169A.012
21 


Insert graphic folio 035 30169A.013
22 


Insert graphic folio 036 30169A.014
23 


Insert graphic folio 037 30169A.015
24 


Insert graphic folio 038 30169A.016
25 


Insert graphic folio 039 30169A.017
26 


Insert graphic folio 040 30169A.018
27 


Insert graphic folio 041 30169A.019
28 


Insert graphic folio 042 30169A.020
29 


Insert graphic folio 043 30169A.021
30 


Insert graphic folio 044 30169A.022
31 


Insert graphic folio 045 30169A.023
32 


Insert graphic folio 046 30169A.024
33 


Insert graphic folio 047 30169A.025
34 


Insert graphic folio 048 30169A.026
35 


Insert graphic folio 049 30169A.027
36 


Insert graphic folio 050 30169A.028
37 


Insert graphic folio 051 30169A.029
38 


Insert graphic folio 052 30169A.030
39 


Insert graphic folio 053 30169A.031
40 


Insert graphic folio 054 30169A.032
41 


Insert graphic folio 055 30169A.033
42 


Insert graphic folio 056 30169A.034
43 


Insert graphic folio 057 30169A.035
44 


Insert graphic folio 058 30169A.036
45 


Insert graphic folio 059 30169A.037
46 


Insert graphic folio 060 30169A.038
47 


Insert graphic folio 061 30169A.039
48 


Insert graphic folio 062 30169A.040
49 


Insert graphic folio 063 30169A.041
50 


Insert graphic folio 064 30169A.042
51 


Insert graphic folio 065 30169A.043
52 


Insert graphic folio 066 30169A.044
53 


Insert graphic folio 067 30169A.045
54 


Insert graphic folio 068 30169A.046
55 


Insert graphic folio 069 30169A.047
56 


Insert graphic folio 070 30169A.048
57 


Insert graphic folio 071 30169A.049
58 


Insert graphic folio 072 30169A.050
59 


Insert graphic folio 073 30169A.051
60 


Insert graphic folio 074 30169A.052
61 


Insert graphic folio 075 30169A.053
62 


Insert graphic folio 076 30169A.054
63 


Insert graphic folio 077 30169A.055
64 


Insert graphic folio 078 30169A.056
65 


Insert graphic folio 079 30169A.057
66 


Insert graphic folio 080 30169A.058
67 


Insert graphic folio 081 30169A.059
68 


Insert graphic folio 082 30169A.060
69 


Insert graphic folio 083 30169A.061
70 


Insert graphic folio 084 30169A.062
71 


Insert graphic folio 085 30169A.063
72 


Insert graphic folio 086 30169A.064
73 


Insert graphic folio 087 30169A.065
74 


Insert graphic folio 088 30169A.066
75 


Insert graphic folio 089 30169A.067
76 


Insert graphic folio 090 30169A.068
77 


Insert graphic folio 091 30169A.069
78 


Insert graphic folio 092 30169A.070
79 


Insert graphic folio 093 30169A.071
80 


Insert graphic folio 094 30169A.072
81 


Insert graphic folio 095 30169A.073
82 


Insert graphic folio 096 30169A.074
83 


Insert graphic folio 097 30169A.075
84 


Insert graphic folio 098 30169A.076
85 


Insert graphic folio 099 30169A.077
86 


Insert graphic folio 100 30169A.078
87 


Insert graphic folio 101 30169A.079
88 


Insert graphic folio 102 30169A.080
89 


Insert graphic folio 103 30169A.081
90 


Insert graphic folio 104 30169A.082
91 


Insert graphic folio 105 30169A.083
92 


Insert graphic folio 106 30169A.084
93 


Insert graphic folio 107 30169A.085
94 


Insert graphic folio 108 30169A.086
95 


Insert graphic folio 109 30169A.087
96 


Insert graphic folio 110 30169A.088
97 


Insert graphic folio 111 30169A.089
98 


Insert graphic folio 112 30169A.090
99 


Insert graphic folio 113 30169A.091
100 

The CHAIRMAN. Next we go to Ms. Perea. 

STATEMENT OF VICKIE PEREA, PRESIDENT, ALBUQUERQUE 

CITY COUNCIL 

Ms. PEREA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It’s an honor for me to 

come before you today to talk about a relevant and important issue 

to the state of New Mexico. 

My name is Vickie Perea. I’m a lifelong New Mexican, a wife of 

43 years, a mother of two, and grandmother of two. I have served 

as a City Councilor and eventually City Council President in Albuquerque. 

Over the last two years, I’ve had the opportunity to study the 

history of elections management in New Mexico. And I appreciate 

your willingness to come to New Mexico to discuss this issue. 

At this time, Mr. Chairman, I’d like to walk you through a brief 

Power Point presentation that details only a small part of the fraud 

that has existed in New Mexico’s election system and how true 

voter identification could help to stop future fraud. 

I’ll begin with the most blatant examples of votes being stolen 

from New Mexico voters in 2004. Rosemary McGee is a Bernalillo 

County voter who tried to vote on election day in 2004, only to find 

that someone else had signed the voting roster in her place early 

in the day and spelling her name wrong. She voted on a provisional 

ballot, and later learned that her legal vote was not counted. You 

can see the voting roster on this slide with Rosemary’s actual signature on the bottom and the signature of the person who voted 

in her place on the top. On the next slide, you can see the ‘‘No’’ 

box checked and circled, indicating that her legal vote was not 

counted. 

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER 1. Can you turn out some of the lights 

up front so we can see it? 

Mr. PEARCE. There’s a screen behind you as well. You may be 

able to get a better look at the back. 

The CHAIRMAN. Yeah. You can also look behind you. 

Ms. PEREA. But Rosemary is not the only one. This also happened to Dwight Adkins, Kim Wistrand, Stephanie Ortiz, Heather 

Philpot and Frank Sanchez. Six voters who we know about whose 

votes were taken from them in 2004. 

I believe that a true voter identification measure is the foundation of a secure election system, and all of these people would have 

been able to cast a ballot and have it counted if voters had been 

required to show a photo voter ID. 

But let me now briefly walk you through a past history of voter 

problems, beginning with the very early example, in 1992, with 

Elodia Candelaria, a community activist in Albuquerque who was 

convicted of embezzlement and voter fraud. In 1997, Rio Arriba 

County’s Deputy Clerk, Henrietta Sandoval-Smith, was convicted of 

voter fraud, saying at the trial, ‘‘I’ve always been guilty.’’ She was 

part of an extensive voter fraud ring in which 19 people were indicted on voter fraud charges, including city councilors, a school 

board chairman, a party chairman, a state police captain, a city 

manager and others. These charges included false swearing, false 

voting, falsifying voter registration forms and unlawfully opening 

ballot boxes and so on. 

101 

Rio Arriba County Clerk David Chavez and his deputy clerk, 

Vicky Martinez, were two of those who were found guilty and sentenced to jail time, with testimony indicating that they had illegally opened ballot boxes in the ’96 primary and the 1997 special 

election, one time with bolt cutters from the local jail. 

This is not the only county clerk to be convicted of fraud, however. In 2003, Dona Ana County Clerk Ruben Ceballos was convicted of five counts of violating New Mexico Election Code. 

In 2000, a district judge claimed that the New Mexico election 

had been compromised and the ballot box containing 252 ballots 

went missing in Bernalillo County. A locked ballot box was later 

found in the back room of a warehouse containing about 250 ballots. 

In 2004, during the canvassing of the thousands of provisional 

ballots in Bernalillo County, the county clerk noted that her workers had seen approximately two dozen instances of double voting, 

meaning that at least 24 voters had attempted to vote two times 

in that election. 

And also, in 2004, we saw significant problems with the 527 

voter registration organizations. In addition to dropping off droves 

of fraudulent registration forms to county clerks in New Mexico— 

many were caught before being processed—there were a number of 

instances where forms were processed and illegal voters were registered or registered voters were re-registered without their knowledge and oftentimes under incorrect Social Security numbers. 

For example, a police officer named Glen Stout received a voter 

registration card for his 13-year-old son and another one for a 15- 

year-old neighbor, both of whom had been registered to vote by an 

ACORN employee. Stout worried that these cards would have been 

sent to another address and someone less honest than he would 

have been—would have used them to vote on election day under 

his son’s name. 

A Tucson, Arizona man received a voter card in his mail. An 

ACORN employee was found to have registered the man in Albuquerque without his knowledge. And we know that fraudulent registrations have been submitted by ACORN in Denver, and employees who have been fired for fraud in Ohio. 

In other instances, police raided an Albuquerque home for a drug 

search, only to find fraudulent voter registration forms at the 

house, along with a crack pipe. The individual was being paid $5 

for each registration form that he turned in. There were also reports of deceased individuals being registered to vote. 

Ladies and gentlemen, I’m running out of time with you today, 

but know that true election reform has been called for by good people on both sides of the political aisle and by the editorial boards 

of newspapers and other publications throughout New Mexico. 

And in the municipal election in 2005, Albuquerque voters overwhelmingly supported a photo voter identification provision with 

approximately 73 percent approval. 

I believe strongly that a system in which voters are required to 

show photo ID to vote will prevent much of the voter fraud that 

we see in our election system today. It is a measure that can be 

fairly applied so as not to disenfranchise a single voter, and it 

would go a long way to increasing ballot security in New Mexico. 

102 

And in a system with a photo ID provision, falsely registering 

voters would be a pointless endeavor because voting under their 

name would all but be impossible. 

I would like to thank you again for spending time in our beautiful state. I love New Mexico and all that it has to offer. I just 

know that our children deserve a clean, fair and honest democratic 

process. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

[The statement of Ms. Perea follows:] 

103 


Insert graphic folio 120 30169A.092
104 


Insert graphic folio 121 30169A.093
105 


Insert graphic folio 122 30169A.094
106 


Insert graphic folio 123 30169A.095
107 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Bryant. 

STATEMENT OF DANIEL A. BRYANT, ESQ., GENERAL COUNSEL, 

OTERO COUNTY, NEW MEXICO 

Mr. BRYANT. Thank you—pardon me. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

It’s a pleasure to be here today. I had prepared myself to welcome you to sunny New Mexico, and I have to tell you I’m delighted that I can’t welcome you to sunny New Mexico. We are 

happy for the rain. 

I live in rural New Mexico up in the mountains north of Ruidoso, 

in Lincoln County. I’m married. I have five children. I’m a lawyer. 

I’ve practiced here for 28 years. 

I’ve represented Otero County as their general counsel that entire time. And I have been on-site in the county clerk’s office from 

about 5:00 a.m. in the morning until God knows when at night for 

every election every two years ever since. And I’ve seen a lot of 

things happen. 

And I just want to express, initially, the opinion that in terms 

of voter registration and voter ID and ensuring that the person 

who is either signing an absentee ballot or an early ballot roster 

or a voter roster on election day is the person who is on the list 

at the address, in New Mexico, the system is just broken. In fact, 

it just doesn’t exist. 

The examples that Ms. Perea has just shared with you are 

spread all over the state of New Mexico. I have been working with 

a group of volunteers associated with the Republican party here in 

Dona Ana County, and they have been working for more than two 

years looking at some of the issues that have come up in elections 

here. And frankly, it’s frightening. 

When we heard about New Mexico’s voter ID law, and we looked 

at how it was going to work, frankly, we chuckled. It was a joke 

from the start. And we’ve seen very similar processes and similar 

problems happen here. 

Once the voter ID cards started coming out, Cecilia Levitino, who 

is with us in the audience today, has lived at her address for more 

than four years. And she received her voter ID card and was delighted. And a few days later, she received another voter ID card 

in the name of Karen Wright at the same address. Ms. Wright 

hadn’t lived there for more than four years. 

Now, if Ms. Levitino wasn’t a committed American and a dedicated, ethical person, she’d have the opportunity to go to the poll 

and vote each one of those ID cards and exacerbate the problem 

here in New Mexico. 

In the 2006 primary election, to give you a recent example, Mr. 

Sid Goddard, the chair of the local party—I’m representing them, 

and they said, ‘‘Dan, what can we do? How can we bring some legitimacy and verifiability to the election process here?’’ 

And I said, ‘‘Well, you know, the most important thing we can 

do is be visible. We’ll stop 85 percent of it if we’ll just let them 

know we are here, and you need to watch us, and we’re watching 

you. 

Well, Mr. Goddard was in the county clerk’s office after the polls 

had closed on election night. And a young man walked in and he 

108 

had a stack of absentee ballots, about 30 of them. And he walked 

up to the counter, and he said, ‘‘Who do I give these to.’’ 

And the young clerk asked him what his name was, and he 

shared that with her. And she said, ‘‘Well, where did you get 

these?’’ 

And he said, ‘‘Well, Lupe gave them to me.’’ 

And then she asked him, ‘‘Well, what precinct are you from?’’ 

And he said, ‘‘Well, I’m down by Sunland Park and Anthony.’’ 

And because Mr. Goddard was there and because he was taking 

notes and watching, those ballots were taken around to the Absentee Voter Precinct Board, and they were instructed that night to 

reject those. And they counted them, and it turned out, in that instance, we caught 27. 

How many got delivered in that fashion that we didn’t catch? An 

effective voter ID registration system and photo ID for voting 

would prevent a significant part of that. 

I’ve been involved in enough elections that I don’t want to sit 

here and tell you that it’s my opinion that photo ID is going to 

solve it all. But what it is, is it is the essential, the critical first 

step in creating a system that really guarantees to Americans that 

their vote counts. 

I’ve got another volunteer with me in the room today, Mr. Tom 

Walker, and he’s been doing some work, and we’ve asked him to 

look at just one precinct here in the county. And so he started looking at the voter registration list and he started checking addresses. 

We looked for deceased voters. We found over 60 deceased voters 

that are still on the voter registration list. 

We then did some more analysis just to take a look at it, and we 

were able to see, by looking back at the voter rosters and the lists 

of who voted in prior elections, that many of those 60 voters had 

voted every election, year after year after year, and then it cut off 

and it stopped and you see a break for four or five years, you know 

something has happened. 

New Mexico has a law. The Bureau of Vital Statistics provides 

a list to the county clerks. The county clerks are supposed to take 

that list and remove those deceased persons from the voter rolls. 

It isn’t happening. Every one of those votes—every one of those 

registrations that’s still on the list is a potential for a fraudulent 

vote. Why? Because I walk in and I say, ‘‘My name is Fred Jones.’’ 

And they look on their roster, and Fred Jones is on the roster. I 

reach out with my pen. I sign my name. They hand me a card. I 

go to the machine and I vote. And that is what we do when we vote 

on election day in New Mexico. 

There is no way to stop me from voting if I know Mr. Jones is 

dead and I know that he’s still on the registration polls. If I had 

to show you an ID, and I had to get an ID that looked like this, 

and it said Dan Bryant, I couldn’t have voted for Mr. Jones. 

It’s a critical first step in helping to solve this problem and create 

some confidence in our voting. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much for your testimony. 

[The statement of Mr. Bryant follows:] 

109 


Insert graphic folio 129 30169a.096
110 


Insert graphic folio 130 30169a.097
111 


Insert graphic folio 131 30169a.098
112 

The CHAIRMAN. Please to recognize Ms. Walker. 

STATEMENT OF KATHLEEN CAMPBELL WALKER, PRESIDENTELECT, AMERICAN IMMIGRATION LAWYERS ASSOCIATION 

Ms. WALKER. Good morning, Chairman Ehlers, Representative 

Pearce and Representative Lofgren. Thank you for the opportunity 

to provide testimony this morning. 

My name is Kathleen Campbell Walker. I am president-elect of 

the American Immigration Lawyers Association. It is an association affiliated with the ABA, American Bar Association, in existence since 1946. And we have about 10,000 lawyers as members 

nationally. 

I’m here today to try to address the immigration law side of the 

equation. I am obviously not a Voting Rights Act expert. I will profess to at least know something about immigration law after practicing for 21 years here in El Paso, Texas—here, a little farther 

down on the border, I should say. 

What I’m very concerned about is that we obviously need to keep 

the right to vote sacrosanct. But when we talk about the issue of 

identity, that particular issue has permeated the area of immigration law in almost every facet, and especially, of course, since 9/11, 

and it should. But the issue that we are trying to deal with, in a 

voting perspective, is establishing citizenship. 

Now, in trying to prepare for this hearing, I went through Proposition 200 in Arizona, Representative Hyde’s 4844 bill, and Mr. 

Tancredo’s 5915 bill recently introduced, and the idea is trying to 

prove citizenship. Well, in the immigration field, that’s something 

that is sacrosanct as well. In order to truly establish citizenship, 

there are a few documents that the federal government considers 

acceptable to establish that you are a citizen. And when we’re, just 

as we’ve heard from other members of this panel, having difficulties in just basic ID, I can only imagine the horror that would be 

created in attempting to truly establish whether or not some voter 

is indeed a U.S. citizen. 

Let me try to outline some issues that unfortunately the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of State are 

frontally against the wall in dealing with this issue. 

Identity is not citizenship. Identity you might see in Proposition 

200 as being established by utility bills as an alternative form of 

record, or even a birth certificate—and I’ve got to tell you that if 

you want to look at the 9/11 Commission’s report, we have a problem in the lack of consistency or authenticity procedures concerning 

our birth certificates. So what do we rely upon when we are looking 

at someone entering the United States to establish they’re a U.S. 

citizen? 

As it stands right now, I’m sure you all have heard about the 

Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, a program or a—it’s based 

on the Terrorism Prevention Act in 2004 that would require U.S. 

citizens and Canadians coming back from a visit to Mexico or Canada, for example, to be able to prove that they are U.S. citizens. 

And if you look at the documentation of about how many citizens 

we have that are crossing our northern and southern borders that 

would need passports—I just wanted to make a quick reference— 

in fiscal year 2001, there were 314,346,000 inspections on the 

113 

southern border. Of those inspections 93 million were U.S. citizens. 

If I look on the northern border, about 100 million inspections were 

made in 2001. 39 million U.S. citizens. If I add those together, I’m 

coming up with about the number of people that voted in the November 2004 presidential election. 

Already, we have the Senate passing a proposal to delay the requirement of proof of U.S. citizenship to January of 2009, based on 

the obvious problem of either being able to issue U.S. passports or 

even an alternative form of document that is being proposed that’s 

like an electronic passport. So we have issues in being able, even 

through the federal government, of doing this job. 

And also some other examples, U.S. VISIT. U.S. VISIT is supposed to be tracking entry and exit into our country. And as it 

stands right now, we have yet to be able to implement exit control. 

Anybody along the border will tell you that we don’t even have facilities to enable one to inspect vehicles departing the United 

States to confirm whether or not someone has actually departed. 

And in addition, are we going to have people that are going to 

get out of cars and present themselves? I can assure you that in 

El Paso, Texas, as well as in Las Cruces, that you are not going 

to have the ability to get commerce back and forth if that particular provision is implemented. 

So what’s happened, logic has indeed prevailed to some degree, 

and we have postponed the full implementation of what originated 

as Section 110, IIRAIRA, because of the practical impossibility. 

What we want is not optical security issues. What we want, in 

a voter registration perspective, are not optical placebos. I think 

that the idea of identity verification is one you have to cautiously 

balance against the concern of voter suppression, and make sure 

that you think of the poor or the disabled and those unable to have 

access or means to be able to provide documentation of just status, 

period, without talking about citizenship. 

Let’s have a further example in the employment verification context. Employers having to document whether or not someone is legally eligible to work, one factor, and then, in addition to that, 

their identity. There are list, A, B and C documents. In the testimony provided— 

He has gotten the gavel. 

In the testimony provided, you will see that there is an example 

of the I–9 form, which for U.S. citizenship purposes, you can prove 

citizenship by a U.S. passport, certificate of citizenship, or a certificate of naturalization. To obtain a certificate of citizenship right 

now costs over $200 and months to process. 

So what I’m trying to invoke here is that it’s quite difficult to be 

able to impose that requirement from a documentation perspective. 

And in brief summary, I also want to make sure that you are 

aware, if someone is a non-citizen and they vote, there are extremely severe consequences in U.S. immigration law to that action. There are two provisions of law that everyone should know 

about. Title 18, Section 1015, which makes it a felony, punishable 

by a fine of up to five years of imprisonment, if you claim U.S. citizenship falsely as your basis to vote in any federal, state or local 

election. 

114 

In addition to that, in Section 611, if I vote in a federal election, 

that is a criminal action, punishable by a fine or up to one year 

imprisonment or both; and in addition, from an immigration perspective, if I do so, I’m subject to removal from the United States; 

and in addition to that, inadmissibility to the United States. 

So I would try to conjecture here that anyone in their right mind, 

who wishes to guard their right to live and work in the United 

States, would never hesitate to cross—excuse me—would never 

cross that line to vote knowing these consequences. 

What I would suggest is that if we have a voter education campaign of trying to provide those who register individuals to vote 

with information about the consequences to a non-citizen if they do, 

then this concern would be resolved. 

Thank you, sir. I see I’m out of time. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

[The statement of Ms. Walker follows:] 

115 


Insert graphic folio 138 30169A.099
116 


Insert graphic folio 139 30169A.100
117 


Insert graphic folio 140 30169A.101
118 


Insert graphic folio 141 30169A.102
119 


Insert graphic folio 142 30169A.103
120 


Insert graphic folio 143 30169A.104
121 


Insert graphic folio 144 30169A.105
122 


Insert graphic folio 145 30169A.106
123 


Insert graphic folio 146 30169A.107
124 


Insert graphic folio 147 30169A.108
125 


Insert graphic folio 148 30169A.109
126 


Insert graphic folio 149 30169A.110
127 


Insert graphic folio 150 30169A.111
128 


Insert graphic folio 151 30169A.112
129 


Insert graphic folio 152 30169A.113
130 


Insert graphic folio 153 30169A.114
131 

The CHAIRMAN. But I’m sure that as we ask questions, you will 

have time to express more of your thoughts. I’m going to get back 

to you on that. 

Ms. WALKER. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Yazzi. 

STATEMENT OF KIMMETH YAZZI, REPRESENTATIVE, NAVAJO 

NATION 

Mr. YAZZI. Good afternoon. Thank you for letting me testify before this hearing. 

First of all, Native Americans, they have been here for a while. 

We’ve been here for a while. And—but it wasn’t until 1924 that we 

were granted citizenship by the United States. And then, in 1948, 

we were granted the right to vote, and we love to vote. We love to 

vote—the voter turnout percentage for Native Americans has always been high. 

And earlier you mentioned something about swing vote. And I 

believe Native Americans have made the deciding vote in some of 

the local, state and federal elections. 

There are 22 tribes in New Mexico. I’m here on behalf of the 

Navajo people. The Navajo Reservation extends into six counties up 

in the northwestern area. And that’s who I’m testifying for. 

We are talking about immigration issues here, and we are talking, I believe, some about the boundary issues, too. And we have 

a lot of boundary issues with our nation as well. We have Mexico 

to the south, we have Texas to the east, Oklahoma to the east, Colorado to the north, Utah, Arizona. Our nation is surrounded by 

boundaries, and we have a lot of concerns with these boundaries 

as well, as Native Americans. 

As far as IDs, our tribe, there’s only a few people, a few—maybe 

a little over half that have IDs, pictorial IDs. We have tribal identifications, but they’re not—they don’t have pictures on them. They 

only have limited information on them, like tribal census numbers, 

what day we were born, where we were born. Sometimes it has the 

tribes that we were born into. 

The Navajo Nation is generally a rural area. We do not have 

streets. We do not have addresses where the residential addresses 

can be identified by numbers or streets. We live in rural areas. Our 

rural—our addresses are identified by physical boundaries, physical locations, chapter houses, highways, intersections, so many 

miles from here, so many miles from there. And sometimes they 

laugh about us. They say, ‘‘Indians live in post office boxes.’’ That’s 

mainly what our addresses are. 

But one thing that we have for sure is, we have the right to vote. 

As Native Americans, we love that right. As a matter of fact, I’m 

sitting before you, I’m registered in two locations. I’m registered for 

the Navajo Nation elections. We elect our president, we elect our 

vice president, our Navajo Nation Council, school board, land 

board, farm board, all these people that represent us in the tribal 

government. But I also am a registered member of the United 

States government. So I also vote for the United States president, 

the senators, the congressmen. So we kind of feel like we are two 

people, because we can vote in two places. 

132 

And then this voter identification issue has—it’s going to limit 

our nation because of some of the stats that I’m going to give you, 

okay. 

Thirty-three percent of our Navajo people, we don’t have plumbing. Sixty-two percent do not have telephones. Twenty percent do 

not have access to vehicles. Fifty-six percent of our Navajo people 

do not have modern heating. We have to chop woods and bring it 

up and build a fire in the stove. That doesn’t mean that we want 

all these modern things. I think we are satisfied with what we 

have. 

But this is where voter identification—we don’t—a lot of the 

Navajos, they don’t—they don’t have bills that they are sent to. 

They don’t have electric—telephone bills. They don’t have electricity bills. They don’t have heating bills. And if a telephone bill 

goes to a location, to an individual’s house, there might be five, six 

people living in that household, and the bills only go to one individual. 

So, in Arizona, we are dealing with Proposition 200, and those 

are some of the issues that come up there, where they want us to 

present two bills, like a telephone or a utility bill. But because only 

one individual in the household receives the bills, other people cannot use the same ones. 

One thing that I think about personally, when the subject of immigration comes up, the subject of illegal voting comes up, illegal 

voter registration, and just like the other industries, like the liquor 

industry or the cigarette industry, we should go after the administrators, the people that provide—the top people instead of the voters, instead of the consumers. 

And for voter registration, that’s what I feel, we should—we 

should—the county clerks, the county officials, the state officials, 

those are the people that should make it easier for people to vote. 

We shouldn’t have to put the burden on the voters at the grass 

root—grass root level to provide identity so they can vote. So that’s 

one of the things that I just wanted to say. 

But we’re willing to work with whomever on these issues. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

[The information follows:] 

133 


Insert graphic folio 159 30169A.115
134 


Insert graphic folio 160 30169A.116
135 

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Hensley. 

STATEMENT OF JENNIFER HENSLEY, LEGAL RIGHTS 

ADVOCATE, NEW MEXICO PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY 

Ms. HENSLEY. Good morning. Thank you for allowing me to testify. 

My name is Jennifer Hensley. I’m a legal rights advocate for 

New Mexico Protection and Advocacy. New Mexico Protection and 

Advocacy, it was founded in New Mexico in 1979. We are a private 

non-profit agency that works with—to expand, promote and protect 

the legal rights of individuals with disabilities. 

My testimony this morning is based on our 26 years of working 

with thousands of individuals with disabilities and most recently, 

over the last few years, after the Help America Vote Act. We believe that people with disabilities will be greatly impacted by having to prove citizenship and by having to provide photo ID. 

Many people with disabilities have lived in residential placements and do not have access to those type of documents. They 

may not have obtained them from a family member or may not 

know how to go about getting those documents. A passport costs about $100, and you must figure out how to 

navigate the system, and it takes a while to apply for those and 

to receive those. 

A photo ID costs $10—a birth certificate costs $10 in New Mexico. However, if you weren’t born in New Mexico, you have to apply 

in another state and pay those fees, and you have to figure out how 

to navigate that system, which many people with disabilities can’t 

do that. 

We receive funding from the Administration on Developmental 

Disabilities under the Department of Health to promote people 

with disabilities participating in the electoral—in the electoral 

process. We encourage Congress to remember that people with disabilities already face barriers to voting, such as inaccessible polling 

places, inaccessible voting machines, lack of access to transportation. We believe that these provisions would cause significant 

hardships to individuals that live on fixed incomes. 

We also believe that imposing such a process that requires people 

to pay a fee to vote is tantamount to a poll tax, which our American—our modern society has rejected. 

We also encourage the committee to remember that not all people live like congressmen—congress people and our friends or our 

neighbors; that while some of us may have driver’s licenses and a 

few may have passports, lack of those documents should not— 

should not prevent people from being able to vote. 

All Americans have the right to vote and want to do so. We encourage the Congress to not put barriers, to remove the barriers. 

Again, please remember that all Americans have the right to 

vote, regardless of the circumstances that they live in, and imposing such a process will leave these people behind and again create 

barriers. 

Again, thank you for allowing me to testify this morning. And 

welcome to Las Cruces. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much for your testimony. 

[The statement of Ms. Hensley follows:] 

136 


Insert graphic folio 164 30169A.117
137 


Insert graphic folio 165 30169A.118
138 


Insert graphic folio 166 30169A.119
139 

The CHAIRMAN. And I certainly agree with your concerns about 

anyone with any disability being able to vote, and that’s why in the 

Help America Vote Act, we specifically made provision that every 

state and every locality has to provide access for anyone with any 

disability. That doesn’t solve all the problems, but it solves part of 

them. 

Thank you all for your testimony. It was excellent. And I really 

appreciate it. It gave me some new insight into it. 

I have one question, just a quick question right off. Ms. Walker, 

you referred to this and also Ms. Hensley, the difficulty of getting 

a photo ID or the expense. In Michigan—and I thought most states 

did this now—you can get a photo ID from the Secretary of State, 

even if you don’t get a driver’s license. You just go down there and 

get it. I’m not even sure there is a fee. For a while there was a 

$1 fee. I’m not sure it’s anything now. 

Do they have anything equivalent to that in New Mexico, that 

you just go down to the driver’s license agency and get your picture 

taken and get a photo ID? 

Ms. HENSLEY. You must pay for it. 

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, Ms. Walker. 

Ms. WALKER. I’m sorry. If I may. 

From the—from the perspective of getting a photo ID, I wonder 

how you are dealing with the issue of fraud, because if you go and 

just get a photograph and put Jane Doe’s name next to that photograph, how does that establish that Jane Doe is indeed the person 

in that picture. I just don’t really see—if we are dealing with the 

fundamental issue of establishing identity, that doesn’t cut it. 

And in addition to that, in the—let’s take the laser visa, border 

crossing card perspective in immigration. That’s what we have—a 

vast majority of Mexican nationals coming across to visit family, 

shop, have in order to enter the United States. But if there’s a 

problem—and they try to secure the document by tying a fingerprint to that card. And at least that’s what you have with that 

laser visa. 

Unfortunately, Congress has not seen fit nor has industry 

seemed to be able to accomplish utilizing the biometrics scanning 

capacity of that card. But it was a good effort. 

So what I’m concerned about for the disabled, just making it 

down to the store to even get the photo ID is a big deal. And somehow, someone has to think it all through. 

The CHAIRMAN. I recognize that. 

Ms. WALKER. Yes, sir. 

The CHAIRMAN. And I’m sure there are ways to deal with that, 

too. We do it in Michigan. 

I want to ask some things specific to New Mexico. There is some 

litigation that occurred here before the 2004 election. It required 

first-time voters who registered by mail to produce some sort of ID 

before voting. The intent was to ensure registrants who did not 

register in person with an election official would have to produce 

some ID before voting. 

The Secretary of State, as I understand it, interpreted this to not 

apply to first-time registrants whose registration forms were handdelivered instead of being mailed. So for those 527 groups that 

were doing these registration drives—and you have testified, I beVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:15 Oct 28, 2006 Jkt 030169 PO 00000 Frm 00141 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A169.XXX A169
140 

lieve. Ms. Perea singled out that as one of the problems—if they 

mailed the forms in, an ID would have been required. If they handdelivered them, no ID required. And a court has sustained the approach. 

Is that policy still in effect at this time, or has this been resolved? I just want to get up to date on this issue. 

Perhaps, Mr. Bryant, since you are an attorney, maybe you can 

clarify that. 

Mr. BRYANT. Mr. Chairman, the issue stands exactly as you 

framed it today, just like it was in 2004. And some form of ID was 

required for mail-in but not for walk-in registrations. In fact, it got 

to the point where one or more individuals could bring in stacks 

of several hundred registrations all at once, and because they were 

hand-delivered, they were simply dropped on the counter and into 

the clerk’s office they went for processing. 

The CHAIRMAN. Any other comments on that? Anyone else. 

Mr. BRYANT. Can I address the photo ID and DMV issue for just 

a moment. 

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, you may. 

Mr. BRYANT. There is a process in New Mexico for obtaining a 

photo ID through the local DMV offices. Historically, it was quite 

a problem, but in more recent years, the department has opened 

storefront locations, desk-type or kiosk-type locations in shopping 

areas. There is an identification requirement and a proof-of-age requirement in the statute for that photo ID, because if you are 

under 21 in New Mexico, your photo is taken on a profile and that 

way somebody who serves alcohol knows immediately, by seeing a 

profile photograph, that you are not old enough to buy alcohol, and 

then full-face photos for people over 21. 

And so certain aspects of Ms. Walker’s concerns about verifying 

the ID are, in fact, addressed in the process. Although I’m not trying to assert that it’s perfect or that it is easy enough so that every 

single person can do that. It has been streamlined, and the system 

has been improved dramatically, especially in the last several 

years. 

The CHAIRMAN. Is there a charge for those? 

Mr. BRYANT. There is a small fee in New Mexico for those photo 

IDs, yes, sir. 

Ms. PEREA. May I—— 

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Perea. 

Ms. PEREA. Mr. Chairman, thank you. 

Addressing that issue specifically to the municipality of Albuquerque, in the last election, there was a requirement for a photo 

ID, and that was provided for free to anybody that didn’t have one. 

The CHAIRMAN. Okay. Thank you very much. My time has expired. 

I am pleased to recognize Ms. Lofgren from California. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

This has been interesting. And I guess we all bring our own personal experiences to whatever we do. And I’ve been in Congress 

now for 11 and a half years, but before that I was on the Board 

of Supervisors in Santa Clara County, which runs all the elections. 

And listening to your testimony, particularly Ms. Perea, it occurs 

to me that obviously we need to protect the right to vote. But we 

141 

are here in a hospital, actually. The first thing the doctors know 

is that first you do no harm. That’s the mission. 

And it sounds to me that there is a need for purging of the rolls 

of dead wood. And that’s something that when I was in local government, we did periodically because people die, they move, and 

you had positive. And so you certainly don’t want to put a photo 

ID requirement that will disenfranchise 400,000 Navajo Americans, 

when the county government could just purge the rolls. I mean, 

you want to make sure that first we do no harm. 

I’ll just give a suggestion, for what it’s worth, as well, in California, the election officials—not that we’re so perfect. But there, 

it’s completely non-party—it’s more than non-partisan, it’s civil 

service. All the election officials are not—I mean, they’re not—most 

of them are voter registered ‘‘decline to state’’ because they don’t 

want any suspicion. But for example, the registrar on voters in our 

county is a civil servant. And so the elected officials and the parties 

have absolutely nothing to do with it. 

And I think there’s never been an instance such as you’ve described where, you know, people grab the ballot boxes with bolt 

cutters. And I would note that a photo ID would not have anything 

to do with the bolt cutters. 

I just want suggest that for people to think about later, my comment here today, because it served us, I think, pretty well. 

I would like to follow up, Ms. Walker, because your time ran out. 

And it’s something, before I was in county government, I was an 

immigration lawyer and I used to teach immigration law. And my 

experience in that is—is and really as a member of the Immigration Subcommittee and the Judiciary Committee, is that people 

who come here illegally primarily come here to get a job, I mean, 

for money. They don’t—they’re not sneaking across the border to 

vote. I mean, they’re sneaking across the border for money. 

[Applause.] 

Ms. LOFGREN. There will be no clapping allowed. 

And for people—it’s very tough to get your legal permanent residence. There’s a lot of paperwork and time involved and the like. 

And at least, in my experience, you would never jeopardize the 

years it would take to get your legal permanent residence, I mean, 

to vote. I mean, if you knew that you could be deported, permanently barred from the United States, and also could serve five 

years in prison, you wouldn’t want to do that to vote. 

Can you address the legal issues relative—I mean, has that been 

in your experience, or am I just unique in that? 

Ms. WALKER. The only way I can think of a legal permanent resident, who in some cases has waited more than 15 years to acquire 

that status, depending upon what country or nationality and visa 

availability, no one, after waiting that long, is hoping to be forced 

to return to their home country. And I think there is a fundamental problem, even within the U.S. public, of thinking that citizenship is somehow the same as legal permanent residence and 

legal permanent residents being given documentation, to say, ‘‘Go 

ahead and—you know, here’s the voting information.’’ And people 

do not appreciate that you’re basically handing them a death warrant when you give that general pleasant information to them. 

142 

So I think an educational memoranda could be easily provided at 

time of voter registration to try to allay that problem. 

Ms. LOFGREN. I’d like to just follow up with Mr. Yazzi. Your description of your home was something. Some day I would like to 

visit. I mean, I’ve never really been to such a place. It sounds so 

remote and so rural. 

I’m thinking, as we talked about, you know, marching down to 

the DMV to get a photo ID, how feasible would that be from your 

home in Navajo land? 

Mr. YAZZI. Thank you for your question. 

The border towns that surround the reservations are quite a distance away. I’m lucky, I live like 15 minutes from Gallup, New 

Mexico. But we have remote locations that are maybe 100, 150 

miles from the nearest—the nearest town, such as Farmington or 

Gallup or, in Arizona, like Flagstaff. It takes quite an undertaking. 

And then, with all the requirements, which is why we don’t—a 

lot of our Navajos do not—some of them have never even driven 

vehicles. Our elderly people have never had IDs. 

And it’s not—you know, a lot of people may think that we probably need it. But when you talk to our elderly people, when you 

talk to the rural Navajos, they’re satisfied with where they’re at. 

They’re satisfied with the way they live. 

And voting, in the Navajo Nation, we treat it like a celebration. 

We changed our Navajo Nation general election to coincide with 

the national election, and our tribe gives our employees the day off 

to go vote. And they treat it like a—they treat it like a holiday. 

That’s where people gather to talk. They campaign. We do—you 

don’t see anyone slinging over there. You see all these food camps 

where people go to eat. They catch up on their lives from last year 

or whatever. But it is treated like a celebration. 

And—but the ideas of the IDs, I don’t think a lot of our Navajos, 

they’re not used to that. 

As a matter of fact, I was just—I e-mailed one of your staff members. Native Americans believe—generally believe that if you take 

a picture of somebody, you take their soul and their spirit. You 

take that away from them, part of it. That’s why they don’t like to 

take pictures as well. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman’s time has expired. 

Mr. Pearce. 

Mr. PEARCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Just a quick comment on Mr. Yazzi’s last statement about the 

belief that taking a picture of someone takes their soul and spirit 

away. Hollywood gives a great credence to that very thing. Probably no group is more photographed than Hollywood. 

Ms. Hensley, I appreciate your advocacy for the handicapped. 

We—my brother is handicapped and actually sits on the Nationwide Handicap Access Board. So it’s an issue that I’m very engaged 

in and have national hearings on access into national parks. 

If—and you present some credible objections here, but they all 

appear to be solvable. If we cure the problem of the cost, if we cure 

the problem of navigating—and keep in mind, we just signed up 27 

million people nationwide, or more, in a very complex Medicare 

plan. And so we have shown the ability to work complex things 

through very large groups of people. 

143 

If we solve those problems, would you find objection then to 

photo ID for—and the way it would affect the handicapped? 

Ms. HENSLEY. The main thing—we’re talking about access. 

Mr. PEARCE. Talking about the ID. 

Ms. HENSLEY. If we solve those problems, possibly. 

Mr. PEARCE. Because we’re here—in Washington, we get a sense 

across the board and we may disenfranchise a few. 

Ms. Perea had a stunning presentation on the documentation of 

the fraud and the articles in the last election. New Mexico did not 

certify the election for 23 days after the election was over. People 

from New Mexico were calling me every day. This is a public and 

national embarrassment for our state. 

I personally know, because I was writing down my figures as 

well as President Bush’s, on election day, he was ahead by 31,000. 

That margin dropped by 26,000 votes, down to 5,000. 

In your view, Ms. Perea, would you think that the provisional 

votes were falling that much in favor of Mr. Kerry? Do you think 

that there were problems in those 23 days that we failed to certify. 

Ms. PEREA. Mr. Chairman and Representative Pearce, I just—I 

just feel we had so many problems across the board on how we 

were receiving those votes and certainly on the provisional ballots, 

that we didn’t have the clear instructions. And not having consistent instructions throughout the 33 counties within the state of 

New Mexico caused an even greater problem. 

Mr. PEARCE. Thank you. 

Now, Mr. Bryant, in my opening statement, I talked about the 

county clerk from this county who was indicted and eventually convicted of voter violations. Was the state secretary—the Secretary of 

State or the director of elections involved in the bringing forth of 

that case. 

Mr. BRYANT. No, sir. It was—that was handled locally by the district attorney’s office in Dona Ana County. 

Mr. PEARCE. And when invited, did the Secretary of State and 

Elections Bureau ever become involved. 

Mr. BRYANT. No, sir. They did not. 

Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chairman, these are things that I know personally and I bring up—and I appreciate you coming to this particular 

location, because Ms. Perea’s testimony and Mr. Bryant’s testimony 

and Ms. Justine Fox’s testimony all tell us the same thing. 

Mr. Bryant, one of the ways here in this state that an election 

fraud occurs is that on election day, you have your poll worker 

signing people in like—say, at a table like this. And sometimes 

someone would come in and look over the shoulder and find a 

blank line, and magically, that person’s the next one at the door. 

It just works over and over in that way. And it was against the 

law. And so people began to bring up the fact that this is occurring. 

Now, in the last—in two legislative sessions ago, I think the legislature changed the law to where it is now legal to come in the 

door, look over the shoulder and see blank lines. Is that a piece of 

legislation that was passed by the state legislature and signed by 

the governor? 

Mr. BRYANT. Yes, sir. It is legal. 

144 

Mr. PEARCE. It is legal now for a worker to come in, look over 

the shoulder, find blank lines, and then, without any identification, 

we have potential problems existing. 

Mr. BRYANT. And what they are supposed to be doing is looking 

for their name in the roster. But you can see that for the voter that 

intends to commit fraud, it’s a wide-open door. 

And isn’t it incredible that things—something as simple as a 

photo ID would absolutely slam the door on 100 percent of that. 

Mr. PEARCE. Now, how many voters—how many voters would not 

know that they had already voted. 

Ms. Justine Fox, were you there when that—that bill was 

passed? What was the conversation that—how many voters were 

documented in the hearings at the state legislature of people who 

didn’t know they had voted on that particular day? It’s just stunning. 

Ms. FOX-YOUNG. Mr. Chairman. 

As is typical, there were no voters who weren’t aware that they 

voted. 

Mr. PEARCE. Okay. 

Ms. FOX-YOUNG. But that’s a conversation we often have in 

Santa Fe. 

Mr. PEARCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I know my time’s about 

gone. I’ll have a second round, if we have them. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

First of all, I would like to pick up on a comment that was made 

by my colleague from California. I don’t think anyone believes that 

illegal immigrants come here to vote, and I suspect that very few 

of them would even attempt to vote illegally if they knew the penalties. 

My concern, and what is emerging to me from this hearing is not 

the individuals who do things like that but organizations that are 

trying in some way or another to subvert an election. 

That, incidentally, is my experience across the country in various 

places where I have been. It’s usually not individuals doing something. Although, there was the case of the gentleman in Tennessee 

who registered his dog and always voted once for himself and once 

for his dog. They knew about it and they tolerated it. But when he 

proceeded to register himself and his dog in three different precincts, that was a bit too much, and so he got in trouble. 

But by and large, it’s organized efforts that I’m concerned about. 

We have Tammany Hall, we have the Pendergrast Machine, et 

cetera. That’s the issue. 

And my concern, in relationship to the illegal immigrants, is that 

organizations may be using them in a way that could really endanger their status in this country. And so if organizations are, in fact, 

deliberately looking for people to vote and deliberately or inadvertently registering illegal immigrants, they’re really endangering 

these folks by having them vote. 

So I think that’s something we have to bear in mind as we try 

to straighten this out. 

Relating again, to the state and the federal government, Representative Fox-Young, you referenced the federal databases that 

exist that have information on immigrant status. But you also indiVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:15 Oct 28, 2006 Jkt 030169 PO 00000 Frm 00146 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A169.XXX A169
145 

cated that local election officials have trouble accessing this information. 

And I wanted to ask Mr. Bryant, since you have a great deal of 

experience at the county level, are they experiencing that problem 

as well, that they are not able to get the information from the federal government that would help them identify who was legally allowed to vote and who was not? 

Mr. BRYANT. Yes, sir, they are. But in addition to that, the way 

the system is set up here in New Mexico, they are, in effect, prohibited from being able to go beyond the voter’s assertion that that’s 

me on the voter roll, as I look at the blank line and offer to vote. 

The way the system is designed here, each party can have a 

watcher and challenger at the polling place who can say, ‘‘I challenge that voter.’’ When they do that, the precinct officials still 

don’t get to ask for a photo ID, but they get together and they vote 

amongst themselves, the precinct officials, ‘‘Do we let this person 

vote or do we not?’’ If the person is, yes, that person votes and the 

matter is over, and there is no way to review that. If they say no, 

then the person is allowed to vote on a paper ballot, and that ballot 

is put in the ballot box for handling during the canvass. 

We have a statement from a watcher in a precinct down in Anthony, New Mexico, in the 2004 election, using this process: He saw 

a van pull up out in front of a polling place, and a number of people climbed out of the van. He went around, and he looked at the 

license plate on the van, and it was Chihuahua, Mexico. And a 

bunch of individuals jumped out of the van, and they went in the 

polling place, they found their blank lines and they voted. And 

there was no effective way for him to do his job. Again, a simple 

photo ID would have stopped all of that from occurring. 

It’s an incredibly simple first step in the process of trying to get 

some confidence and some vitality, especially here in New Mexico. 

The CHAIRMAN. Representative Fox-Young, do you have a comment? 

Ms. FOX-YOUNG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

If you back up a moment into the registration process and look 

at those databases and how they might be relevant there, you have 

the same problem. The burden lies on the voter throughout the registration process in New Mexico. 

But we have databases here that could be useful. We have Homeland Security has—and ICE have databases of folks who have overstayed their time in the country. New Mexico Motor Vehicle Department has databases of individuals who have applied for and 

brought in documents to obtain driver’s licenses. But there is no 

mechanism for our election officials to use those and to verify. 

And I think your point that we are looking at a huge problem 

with the incentives that 527s have to generate, you know, higher 

and higher registration numbers and get folks to polls, a very vulnerable population, and there is no check. We have the means to 

do it, but we have no statutory authority to do it. 

The CHAIRMAN. One last question. The Real ID Act, which Congress passed, which would solve much of the ID problem, we hope. 

But it goes into effect in 2008 and will impose new requirements 

of those seeking ID. 

Has New Mexico begun to implement this law? 

146 

Ms. FOX-YOUNG. Mr. Chairman, if I may. 

New Mexico has begun to discuss it. Certainly, in interim committee meetings this summer, we already are. The Revenue Stabilization Tax Committee discussed it last week, in fact, and has 

started to put—put things into place. But there has been no substantive movement that I know of, in terms of implementing it. 

The CHAIRMAN. All right. Thank you. My time has expired. 

I’m pleased to recognize the gentlewoman from California, Ms. 

Lofgren. 

And I’ll hand the gavel to you. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I—listening to this, and we had actually tried to get a representative from AARP, but our logistics didn’t work. But at our last 

hearing, this is what the AARP said to the House Administration 

Committee. 

They said, ‘‘New state laws in implementing rules will significantly limit opportunities to register and/or vote. Many persons 

who are qualified to vote but do not have ready access to documents, such birth certificates, driver’s licenses and passports, that 

have never been deemed necessary in the past, may lose the fundamental right to vote.’’ 

And as I looked into this whole ID testimony about photo IDs, 

I think there is an assumption that sometimes—and we need to 

guard against, that everybody is in the same situation as I am, and 

it’s not the case. I think about my dad, who was a truck driver, he 

never had a passport, and actually less than 20 percent of Americans have passports. 

Or I think about nursing home residents. I mean, in the study 

in Wisconsin, 5 percent or less of nursing home residents had a 

photo ID. And obviously, if you’re in a nursing home, you can’t go 

down to the DMV and get even a free photo ID. 

So I think we need to—and my colleague, Mr. Pearce, mentioned 

the Medicaid situation. And I think actually that’s instructive, because we put in the Budget Deficit Reduction Act a proof of citizenship requirement to receive Medicaid. And what we found out, in 

the hospitals and the nursing homes and the like, basically said 

there are individuals who are Americans who can’t—they can’t 

prove it, but they are Americans. They’ve worked there all their 

lives. They’ve paid their taxes. And now they’re in a nursing home. 

Some of the examples of people who are very elderly, who—they 

were born at home and didn’t have a birth certificate, or they had 

moved many times and they couldn’t—they didn’t have their documents with them. And yet, you know, they are the Americans, and 

you can’t. 

And if you can’t produce a document to save your life, which is 

basically what we are talking about for Medicaid, I think, you 

know, certainly that’s a more important thing to most Americans 

than voting. As precious as voting is, living is even more precious 

than voting. 

So I think the fact that we had to actually relieve that requirement for the Medicaid system is quite instructive. 

You know, I wanted to talk to you, Ms. Hensley, on some of the 

issues faced by the disabled community. And obviously, if you don’t 

147 

see, you don’t have a driver’s license. If—mobility may not be impaired but it’s certainly more difficult if you can’t pop in your car. 

So even if there were a reduction in fees or the like, how—speaking for yourself and also for others who—who are disabled, how 

easy would it be to go and get these ID cards? 

Ms. HENSLEY. Not easy at all. As you say, most people have driver’s licenses but not everybody. And just access, the fact of getting 

down there for people with disabilities. And in New Mexico, we 

have a very rural community, where 90 percent of people with disabilities don’t have access to transportation. And so it would be 

very difficult and add another barrier amongst all the other ones 

that we face regularly. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Someone said—I don’t remember who—that a 

large percentage of voters approve these photo ID items. 

But I always carry a copy of the U.S. Constitution with me on 

my person, and when things get slow, I read through it. And the 

Fourteenth Amendment is really an important one, because it says 

that no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the 

privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States or which 

shall deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due 

process of law and/or deny to any person within its jurisdiction 

equal protection of the laws. And of course, Article Fifteen provides 

the rights of citizens of the United States shall not be denied or 

abridged. 

Now, it seems to me—and I would appreciate comment from any 

of the members—that if those who cannot produce proof of citizenship are disproportionately poor, rural, elderly or disabled, and 

there are other remedies, for example, challenging and having provisional ballots if one suspects fraud, purging the rolls, how could 

this voter ID measure meet the requirements? 

Before—maybe I should direct that to the two lawyers on the 

panel. 

Ms. WALKER. If I may, in the lawsuit that is currently pending 

regarding Proposition 200, that indeed is one of the arguments of 

the ACLU and others bringing that action. And fundamentally, I 

think you—it is the phrase, You’re using a bazooka to deal with 

something versus the appropriate measure that might actually deal 

with remedying the situation. I don’t see how you can avoid violating the Fourteenth Amendment in those circumstances. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Bryant, you may disagree. 

Mr. BRYANT. If we have two lawyers on the panel, there is liable 

to be a disagreement. 

My approach is actually quite the opposite, Representative 

Lofgren. What we have in New Mexico is, we have an existing 

abridgement of the right to vote for a vast number of voters here 

by the current statutory scheme that exists and the lack of ability 

to guarantee that we know that the voter who is voting is the voter 

that is supposed to be voting. 

I’ve got a letter from Lois Hart with me today about her mother 

who is elderly and disabled. The last time her mother was able to 

vote was in 1996, and she voted absentee because of her health. 

Since then, she’s been too ill to vote. But the poll books in Dona 

Ana County reflect that Vada Hart has voted in a number of elections since then. And Lois knows it’s not her mother. She cares for 

148 

her at home. And Lois writes, ‘‘This can only mean that someone 

is stealing her name and casting her vote.’’ 

And we have allowed a system to develop, a problem to exist that 

is abridging Vada Hart’s right to vote, it’s stealing her right to 

vote, and it’s criminally negligent in New Mexico to continue to do 

that. 

Ms. LOFGREN. If I may, Mr. Bryant, the issue—the question really is whether this lady—and obviously, it’s an important issue that 

she raises—whether the remedy is to disenfranchise 450,000 Navajos that Mr. Yazzi is here to represent. 

Mr. BRYANT. And if that were really the result, I would give you 

a resounding no. But it isn’t the result, and it doesn’t have to be 

the result. 

What we have to do is, we have to balance the interests of the 

integrity of the electoral process here in New Mexico with the interest of Mr. Yazzi and the Navajos, New Mexico’s Hispanics, our— 

our entire population. 

In the salute to our flag, we call ourselves United Cultures, and 

we indeed are here. 

And I believe absolutely that we can put in place a legitimate, 

viable voter ID program that includes a photograph so that when 

I go to the poll, they know it’s Dan Bryant that is offering to vote, 

and do that in a way that does not infringe on our Navajos. 

Ms. LOFGREN. I’m about to run out of time. But I’ll just say this: 

I think that we could do that in this circumstance. If, as a matter 

of policy, the federal government fingerprints every baby and every 

person in the United States. Goes out to every corner of the country, fingerprints every Native American, fingerprints every nursing 

home resident and makes sure that there is no exception, that we 

have biometrics on every person born and who has already resided 

in the U.S., then you could do that positive ID. 

But I don’t—I don’t see that that’s what we are going to do, number two. And I also don’t think—I mean, I’m not recommending it. 

But I don’t hear from my constituents in California that that’s 

something they think is a good idea. I mean, they feel that is intrusive, from a private point of view. But there could be a nationwide 

debate on that point. 

Because I—well, I guess my time is over, Mr. Chairman. Thank 

you for allowing me. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. There will be a third round, and you 

can continue the speech. 

Congressman Pearce. 

Mr. PEARCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Yazzi, I grew up in a very rural part of New Mexico and am 

familiar with having to give directions to turn right at this sign 

post, go five miles, and then I’m on the second or third house on 

the right, depending on which way you count. And so I’m very familiar. 

But I am aware that the enhanced 911 system has established 

streets and house numbers so that the place that I lived that never 

had an actual street or number now has one, and so I don’t know 

if they’ve worked their way through your neighborhood yet, but I 

suspect they are on the way. Because what the idea is, is that we 

149 

can GPS coordinate every 911 call so that police can respond immediately, no matter where it is. And that’s a right of all Americans. 

And so one of the problems that we face in registering and identifying people that you mentioned as a problem would certainly be 

well within solution. 

Mr. Bryant, you heard the suggestion that one of the beginning 

points is simply the purging of the rolls. Have you been involved 

in any purging of rolls with counties, or are you familiar with counties that have attempted to purge the rolls here? Give us a little 

bit of an idea of what the circumstances are when you purge the 

rolls here in this state. 

Mr. BRYANT. Historically, the purge program was run after every 

biennial election, and it was based on voter activity at the polls. 

With the adoption of HAVA, the ability of county clerks in New 

Mexico to purge voter lists was significantly altered and reduced. 

As a result of that, in terms of purging, we are in significant trouble in New Mexico. 

And I can share an example for you right here in Dona Ana 

County. Mr. Walker, in doing some work for us, he went and took 

a look at some of the areas here in the city of Las Cruces, because 

we have lots of apartment complexes because we’re a college town. 

And so we took 19 apartment complexes and we cross-referenced 

the voter registrations for those complexes. Then we went to the 

complexes and we asked for lists of current voters. Thirteen out of 

19 complexes responded. And out of those 13, we had a total of 

1,000 registered voters. Six hundred and sixty of them no longer 

lived at those addresses. 

Now—and I heard the murmuring behind me. I was staggered 

when Mr. Walker produced those numbers for me. 

So the reason I keep saying photo voter ID is an important 

first—a critical first step is because there are a number of things 

that need to occur to create true integrity and verifiability here in 

New Mexico. But I just believe that it is a critical first step. There 

are other things that need to be done and other pieces of the puzzle 

we need to fix. 

Mr. PEARCE. Thank you. 

Ms. Perea, you had—you have by far the most documentation in 

the hearing today. 

Now, did I hear you say that you had complaints and you have 

documentation from both Democrats and Republicans? In other 

words, this is not a partisan issue, or is it a partisan issue? 

Ms. PEREA. Mr. Chairman and Representative Pearce, it is by no 

means a partisan. It’s a citizen issue. It’s a concern of our governor. 

It’s a concern of Senator Domenici. We have quotes up and down 

on the various individuals that want to do something about the 

problems that we have in New Mexico. 

Mr. PEARCE. So you basically find that all people, regardless of 

registration, say, ‘‘Just give us a fair election, and we, as citizens, 

will live with the results. But give us a fair election.’’ Is that a fair 

summary of—— 

Ms. PEREA. Fair, timely. The timeliness of our elections is critical 

in the state of New Mexico. Making sure that we have all the administrative checks and balances in place, yes. 

150 

Mr. PEARCE. Okay. Ms. Walker, right at the end of the first questioning by Mr. Ehlers, you had made a comment, something about 

the education. I was being distracted at the moment and did not 

get that fully. 

Could you repeat, if you remember, what you were saying about 

the way that we could combat this with education of our—of the 

people who are coming into the country? 

Ms. WALKER. Well, I think it’s not necessarily, well, registration 

of just people coming into the country, but it’s when you look at 

a government official. If you come up to a municipality or to a city, 

and the officer, after you registered for selective service, gives you 

also a voter registration card, and you’re thinking, This must a 

good thing, I’ll go ahead and do it. There are few people that are 

aware of these provisions in Title 18, who are here legally—legal 

permanent residents, and don’t recognize that this severe consequence will obtain if they go ahead and send that card in, just 

that simple act. 

So I think providing that information at the time of registration 

would help. 

Mr. PEARCE. Would be—you would declare that to be the first 

significant step, that is, when they come into the nation, just give 

them some information that this is a fairly serious deal. All Americans take the right—— 

Ms. WALKER. Right. And then, also, I think that you would buttress that by educating voter registration organizations, that when 

they are running out there to try to get the vote—— 

Mr. PEARCE. You bet. 

Ms. WALKER [continuing]. That they provide that information as 

well. 

Mr. PEARCE. And I appreciate that. 

And again, I think it’s the Chairman that mentioned—that someone has mentioned that we are trying to balance all concerns, because again we don’t come into these things as a partisan issue. 

Everybody is representing concerns from their eyes and their viewpoint, and that’s what the process is all about. 

And just in the last piece of my time, Mr. Chairman, I don’t 

know who would be best to answer, but what do you find, as far 

as information presented to the people who are coming into the 

country? Do they get any information, Mr. Bryant or Ms. Perea, 

Justine Fox-Young, that helps them understand the sanctity of this 

voting process? And do they get information at the time they register? 

Mr. BRYANT. Representative Pearce, the answer to that is no, 

and the answer is quite the opposite. In many instances, they are 

encouraged by organizations to go ahead and register to vote. 

The point that I would make, with respect to that segment of the 

issue is this: In New Mexico, because of the way the process works, 

they are virtually guaranteed that if they do vote, if they do register and they do vote, they will never get caught, because there 

is absolutely no way for me to prove after the fact that it was, in 

fact, that person who voted and signed on that line at the poll that 

day. There’s no mechanism in place that would allow that to happen. 

151 

And so I don’t see the penalties as ever being able to effectively 

attach, at least not here in New Mexico. 

Mr. PEARCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

As I yield back, I would just recommend that you listen closely 

to Ms. Walker’s suggestion. I think that it is a valid one, and provision of information would certainly be a very good step, also. 

And just—we are all trying to work our way through a very 

tight, thorny little issue, and it has a lot to do with the confidence 

of American people in our system, and I think it’s well worth the 

effort. 

But I yield back to you. 

The CHAIRMAN. And I thank you. 

We’ll begin our third round of questions, and I’ll follow up basically on the same lines you raised in terms of giving information. 

Several of you have raised the issue about 527 groups registering 

voters. I presume they are not the only ones registering voters. At 

least in my home state, the Republicans go out and try to register. 

The Democrats try to register. And a particular candidate may 

want to increase the registration in a certain area. There are some 

rules about educating those people who are registering voters. 

Are there rules governing that in this state? When you complain 

about the 527 groups, are these groups actually informing, as Ms. 

Walker said they should, making sure that they register people 

who are citizens, or do they just take any name they can get? 

Do they have to undergo any training of any sort from the local 

city clerk or county clerk? And are they allowed to be paid based 

on the number of registrations they get? 

Ms. Fox-Young. 

Ms. FOX-YOUNG. Sure. Mr. Chairman, we did make one significant step in the last session in terms of regulating 527s, so to 

speak, or any—any registering agents. This state used to function, 

I think, like a lot of states, where you had deputy registrars who 

had to register—provide personal information with the local authorities or the state before doing so, and we had gotten away from 

that. 

Now that we see so much soft money coming into all the states, 

particularly the swing states, I think it is still true that the parties 

engage in significant registration drives and individual candidates 

do. But the bulk of registrations are coming from the 527 groups 

because that’s where the money is. 

So we—we did pass a law in the last session requiring—as part 

of this election reform bill, requiring 527 agents to register with 

the Secretary of State. They do not need to undergo any training. 

They do still pay their agents, and it is still an unbiased process. 

And I think as long as you have those incentives there and as 

long as there are people who want to invest in swing states and 

get the numbers up, you will continue to see these problems. Although, I think we will be better off now that we know who is 

doing particular registrations. 

But if you look at, for instance, some of the registration cards 

that I brought in, there is a line—and this was part of the litigation that you brought up over first-time registrants and the HAVA 

requirement. The court did uphold the Secretary of State’s interpretation of that law, as you said. 

152 

But anyway, through that litigation, it was impossible for anybody to determine who had actually turned in a registration card. 

There was no paper trail back to a particular 527, back to the 

party, back to the candidate, and now there is. And so there is a 

way, if you want to pull all your cards, to go back now and check. 

The CHAIRMAN. All right. Thank you. 

Several of you have raised comments and concerns about a photo 

ID, which is something that Mr. Bryant proposed, or some other 

way of ensuring, as my colleague from California mentioned, 

fingerprinting. And we are concerned about the difficulty of access 

for certain groups, the difficulty of getting it done, the cost. Some 

of you referred to a poll tax. 

Let me ask, if either the state or federal government provided 

that service at no cost, if they were able—willing to go to the 

homes of those who could not get out or to the reservations of those 

who didn’t have means of transportation, would you still have an 

objection to a photo ID? 

Ms. Walker. 

Ms. WALKER. Just a very fervent comment. 

The CHAIRMAN. Yes. 

Ms. WALKER. My background is in biometrics and border security, and I’ve testified three times on the hill on those issues. 

And what bothers me the most, in trying to establish the issue 

of identity in this concept, is that we have just finished trashing 

the whole idea of using a card with a simplistic photo on it to establish the identity of an individual. The problem is, if it’s a fraudulent card and has somebody else’s photo on it and I adopt the 

identity of Jane Doe, it ties to that particular card at the moment. 

So that’s the reason why we went through the effort of creating 

a laser visa document, to put the biometrics so that the identity is 

tied to the body versus tied to a particular photo. 

I just wonder at the ability to decrease the current levels of fraud 

regarding those individuals willing to go out there and create their 

own documents, what the percentage is and what this really will 

do regarding the reduction of that type of fraud. 

The CHAIRMAN. I’m not sure I quite understand. I understand everything up to the last little bit. 

Ms. WALKER. I’m sorry. I get too wrapped up in this. I apologize. 

The CHAIRMAN. No, that’s fine. 

Ms. WALKER. I need to get a life. 

The CHAIRMAN. I think there are a number of other people 

wrapped up in that. 

Ms. WALKER. But unwrapping myself from a biometrics role print 

for a minute and the whole integration and host of dilemmas right 

now facing the federal government. If I am intending to commit 

voter fraud and I want to adopt the identity of the dead person who 

is still on the rolls, I go get the name and I have a photo ID made. 

Unless you have stringent processes in place regarding verification 

of ID in some manner before that document is created, then you’ve 

created what we call it, as an optical solution. It looks good, but 

it doesn’t really achieve the objective. That’s all. 

The CHAIRMAN. Okay. When you talked about an ‘‘optical placebo,’’ I assumed you meant that. 

Ms. WALKER. Yes, sir. 

153 

The CHAIRMAN. Now, in Michigan, when we die, we want to be 

buried in Chicago so we can continue our political involvement 

after death. 

It’s the same problem. But there are ways of dealing with it. The 

biometrics is one way, and there are various biometrics. And I just 

met last week with a company that makes a card that is very, very 

difficult to, in any way, reproduce or to falsely identify someone. 

So there are solutions, if we would do that. 

Ms. WALKER. Right. 

The CHAIRMAN. And that is expensive. 

Ms. WALKER. Yes, sir. It’s just how far up the chain you’re willing to go. 

The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Right. But if we did that, then is your objection removed? 

Ms. WALKER. If I have an actual card that deals with identity 

documentation, then I don’t have an objection that—it’s a good idea 

to be able to say Joe Blow is indeed Joe Blow. But if I’m just creating a card that doesn’t really have that basis, then, no, it seems 

to be a wasted effort. 

The CHAIRMAN. And that’s part of the Real ID cards that I’m not 

really satisfied in that legislation. 

Would anyone else wish to comment on that? Mr. Yazzi. 

Mr. YAZZI. Thank you for giving me time to comment. 

As far as the voter ID, in Arizona, we are dealing with Proposition 200, and that was initiated by the voters of Arizona. 

The CHAIRMAN. Right. 

Mr. YAZZI. And our Navajo Nation is starting to feel the drastic 

effects of Proposition 200 immediately, because if a Navajo doesn’t 

provide the proper voter identification, they are going to get a provisional ballot, and they’re going to be asked to provide the proper 

ID within a certain amount of days. And with the county offices 

being so far from the rural area of the Navajo Nation, they are not 

going to want to go back to the county offices within five days to 

provide the proper ID for one vote. 

That’s where the issues that are on the ballot, the people that 

are on the ballot that they voted for, their votes are not going to 

count for that particular election. And we are talking about November—September’s Arizona primary. November’s their general election. 

The CHAIRMAN. Right. 

Mr. YAZZI. So, you know, it’s going to have drastic effects immediately. 

And there is other ways that we have been suggesting, like 

only—the only people that can vote is registered voters, right? So 

why can’t we provide voter identification when they register instead of at the polls? See, those are some of the suggestions that 

we have. 

And one thing that I’m here to say is, whatever way this goes, 

whichever avenue you take, we are willing to work with people on 

this. We are willing to work with the counties, the states, the federal. But we just need you guys to recognize that Native Americans 

have an issue with this, with photo identification. 

The CHAIRMAN. And I totally agree with that. And my point is 

simply that if we are serious about doing it, then we have to face 

154 

the fact that it is going to be expensive, because to provide proper 

registration and identification procedures is not cheap. 

And I’m sure, Ms. Walker, you are aware of the cost of that, too. 

I think we all have to recognize that. 

In many cases, it’s relatively easy. But part of what we’re going 

through is a result of the fact that over the past quarter century 

and maybe half century, this country has become exceedingly mobile, and we’ve ended up—most of us have ended up living in larger 

cities. 

There was no problem when I was a child. The town clerk knew 

everyone in the town personally, and so they didn’t need ID. The 

world has changed. 

And those who wish to use nefarious means to influence elections 

are taking advantage of that and trying to work their will. And I’m 

not throwing stones at anyone here, but it happens. I’ve seen it 

happen. 

And I’ve seen it happen in senior citizen homes, where someone 

will go in with a sheet of absentee ballots and come out with those 

absentee ballots completed and turn them in. 

I mean, it’s everywhere. So it’s not as widespread as it could be. 

But I certainly want to make sure we try to stop it where we can. 

I would also just want to notice, we will certainly, whatever we 

do, try to avoid the poll tax issue. I don’t think that’s a real problem. 

Yes, Ms. Perea. 

Ms. PEREA. Mr. Chairman, on that point, as far as the cost was 

concerned, I would just like to point out that in New Mexico, because of the legislative action that we had last year, there was a 

million dollars that was spent to give identification cards to the 

voters of New Mexico, only to be told that they didn’t need them 

when they went to the polls because they were incorrect and there 

were many errors. 

And there had been the purging of the numbers of the voters in 

2005. But there was still 60,000 of those cards that were out there 

that were not valid voter ID cards. And if I may, this is a copy of 

those cards. And yet, we had the Secretary of State go up on TV 

saying, ‘‘Oh, don’t worry about it if you didn’t get it, because you 

really don’t need it to vote.’’ 

And as long as we have those Band-Aid approaches, we continue 

to spend a million dollars or more on things that are not resolving 

the problem in the state of New Mexico. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

My time has more than expired. 

Do you have a question? 

Ms. LOFGREN. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

I think there are a couple of—at least two issues about the photo 

ID. One really is about the ID itself. And it’s worth noting that it’s 

actually not that hard to get a photo ID, if you want one. I mean, 

the 9/11 terrorists had 63 photo IDs. I don’t think they had them 

to vote, but I mean, they were able to obtain them. The other issue 

is, what documents do you need in order to get the photo ID? 

In Mr. Hyde’s legislation that actually was the subject of the 

hearing on the hill provides for various—well, provides for proof— 

155 

positive proof of U.S. citizenship, which is not necessarily always 

available even for people—especially for people who are elderly. 

So I guess the question about current IDs—— 

Let me ask you this: Representative Fox-Young, it sounds like 

you have done some—in the legislature, some analysis and study 

of this. One of the Wisconsin studies that I referenced earlier, that 

is part of our record that was inserted from a prior hearing, indicated that a small percentage of students actually had a driver’s 

license that had their current address when they registered in college, as they are free to do, and that a substantial number of married women—newly married women had driver’s licenses with their 

maiden names, not their current names, and that, as I mentioned 

earlier, a very small percentage of nursing home residents actually 

had driver’s licenses. 

Did you—did the legislature look at what percentages of, for example, students and married women? What the case is here in New 

Mexico? 

Ms. FOX-YOUNG. Representative Lofgren, we—I can’t tell you offhand what the exact percentages are. I can tell you I have a lot 

of difficulty with my name everywhere I go, and there are many 

variations of it. 

But we did look at issues surrounding Native Americans, homeless, students, people whose names have changed, people who have 

moved, and were able to work out—in the final bill, we didn’t pass 

all of those exemptions, and I don’t think we really got an ID bill 

out that had real teeth. You know, you end up with ID; if not ID, 

then, you know, a written statement; if not that, then an oral. 

But we did look at those issues and we found ways around all 

of them. I mean—— 

Ms. LOFGREN. If I may, one of the witnesses that we had in our 

last—he was just a fabulous—I mentioned him earlier, the law professor at George Washington—made a point—and he has a book actually out on it that I think is so important—which is that we need 

to legislate based on statistics and analysis rather than legislate on 

anecdotes. 

And because—for every—there should be no voter fraud. Nobody 

is for voter fraud. I mean, that’s 100 percent, every single person 

in this room. 

But if you prevent one person from committing voter fraud, but 

in doing so disadvantage 1,000 people from—who are Americans 

from voting, then that’s the wrong parameter. I mean, that’s why 

we need the statistical analysis. 

Let me ask—I know we are supposed to be out of here at 11:00. 

Getting to the other issue, which is the documentation to get the 

ID, Mr. Yazzi, how many of the people in Navajo—the Navajo Nation have birth certificates that they could provide to—as an underlying document to get an ID that would comply with Mr. Hyde’s 

bill? Do you know that? 

Mr. YAZZI. Thank you for your question. 

Not right off, but we have—we have people that do not have 

birth certificates. And I’m 45 years old. And even some people in 

their 30s are born at home that don’t have birth certificates. 

My first son, he’s in the United States Navy, he was born at 

home, and he was born in 1982. And we had a problem with not 

156 

getting his birth certificate because they wanted Arizona to issue 

it and Arizona wanted New Mexico to issue it. He was born in New 

Mexico. But we finally were able to get it, but we had a problem 

getting it. 

But there are a lot of people. My mom doesn’t have a birth certificate at all because she was born at home. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you. 

I—you know, although I think we have some disagreements on 

the panel, this actually, I think, has produced some useful—a useful piece of information that we might be able to do something 

with, which is—has been referenced before, which is about voter 

education. 

And a lot of people may not realize—and this came out actually 

in the California contest with Mr. Dornan. There were seven people 

who had passed their citizenship test but had not yet taken the 

oath. And they voted because they thought they legally could, but 

they couldn’t. They couldn’t legally vote because they hadn’t yet 

taken the oath. So it wasn’t an intent to defraud, but it was an 

education problem. 

If you are in the United States military, if you’re in Iraq but 

you’re a legal permanent resident, you still can’t vote. And so we 

are going to reach out to our—our servicemen fighting in Iraq so 

they can vote. But we need to make sure that the servicemen who 

aren’t yet citizens don’t—don’t vote. 

So a lot of this is information—and I think we can all agree that 

that kind of information would be a helpful thing, in addition to 

the purging. I just note, again, from my—my experience in local 

government what we did and still do. 

And it saves the county money, actually. You would think it 

wouldn’t. We sent out postcards and—to the residents and—periodically. And we do it three times. And if after three times, they 

don’t send it back, then we purge it. And we make it up in postage, 

because then you get the people who’ve moved, and it really—it 

works pretty well for us. So I’ll just throw it out for what it’s worth. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to question. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you for your comments. 

As a former resident of California, I received those communications. And I think California may be one of the few states that does 

that. I personally found it extremely useful to get those communications in the mail regarding what was to be voted on and so 

forth. And every state, I would hope, would aspire to do that. 

Representative Pearce. 

Mr. PEARCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Again, appreciate the hearing and appreciate the opportunity to 

be here and be a part of the panel. 

This is not technically an immigration hearing, but there’s been 

enough things come up that I would like to—Mr. Chairman, you 

are little bit closer to leadership than I am, a little bit closer to the 

top of the heap than what I am as a second-termer. 

But if you would remind the House—my concerns with the House 

passed a bill that caused my vote against it. I think, if you would 

remind them that there were three things that were problematic, 

one, holding employers accountable for understanding and 

verifying the documents with which they hire people, both Social 

157 

Security or green cards or whatever. And we understand the counterfeits that are available. And as an employer, myself, I know that 

it is very difficult. That was problematic. 

The provision of making all illegal immigrants felons was a very 

difficult provision, that actually Chairman Sensenbrenner tried to 

amend out on the floor and had very few Democrat supports. I’m 

not sure if they didn’t understand that he was trying to—he recognized he had made a mistake and tried to get that out of the bill. 

We had visited with him as the bill went to the floor, and so he 

was trying to get it out. 

And finally, the issue of making people responsible—they were 

trying to get the ‘‘coyotes’’ to be penalized and instead stated it 

broadly enough that all people that helped illegals would be criminals. And I’ve got members and people who live in this district who 

want to follow the law very closely, but they still tell me—they live 

on the border, and they tell me they set water and food out because 

that’s a human condition, and the people coming across the desert 

often just have been there for days, sometimes dragging kids. 

And those three provisions, if you move forward, I would appreciate, if we do anything on immigration, if you would remind the 

leadership about those. 

The—I’ve got a brief thing here, again, to express my concern. 

I’ve got a breakdown of the elections of 2004 in this county. It’s not 

districtwide or it’s not statewide. But in this county, 922 votes were 

cast above the number of certified signatures. 

On election day, it was a very close vote in this county, with the 

Democrat lead being at 4.8 percent of the early vote. It swung a 

little bit on election day, increased to 8 percent. But when we look 

at the absentee and provisional ballots, 27 percent of absentee and 

37 percent of the provisionals came out. So fully, the differential 

between that and election day was very dramatic. 

Again, if you looked at other voting patterns on that election day, 

if you looked at the nine propositions, actually the vote was very 

close. If you didn’t find the absentee provisional ballots to swing 

that hard one way or the other. 

On election day, for the President—the President—President 

Bush actually was a little bit ahead in the early vote by 44 votes. 

He was a little behind on election day by 404. But when the absentees were counted up, President Bush lost 2,043 votes here, in the 

absentee. Again, the differentials—the spread on election day with 

the present voting and the early vote was very, very nominal. But 

we see a 27.5 percent spread on the absentees. 

Same thing happened on my election. I was ahead by 1741 votes 

on election day and with the early vote. But then, when we talked 

about the absentees, I actually—that 1700-vote spread was pulled 

down to only 1600—or only to 67 votes. 

And again, you just have to—you have to see problems in the solution. 

Mr. Chairman, I want to compliment you on this panel. I think 

that with the three of us up here and with this panel, I believe that 

if it were up to us, we could sit down and craft a bill to take us 

somewhat closer to the goal of fair and timely elections. 

I know that I could work with every single member. Ms. Hensley 

and Mr. Yazzi both have good, compelling points that we need to 

158 

remember any time we’re trying to make changes in the system. 

Ms. Walker is objective and has presented good evidence about the 

concerns that we literally face in creating IDs for people. 

And then Mr. Bryant, Ms. Perea and Representative Fox-Young 

have all presented good information, saying that we probably can 

do better. We should do better. 

And so, from my perspective, from New Mexico, I appreciate you 

coming into the Second District and having this hearing. Because 

I believe if it were up to this panel here, the groups at the two tables, we could come to a resolution. 

Unfortunately, we have to get 218 votes, not three votes, in the 

Congress. So it gets a little bit thornier as we spread it out across 

the country. 

But I appreciate every single person’s testimony today and the 

balance they bring to the—to the hearing. 

And with that, I would give back my time, Mr. Chairman. 

Thanks again for being in the Second District of New Mexico. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. And it’s been a real pleasure to be 

here today. And you saved me some work by giving the thank yous 

that I was going to give. 

You’ve been a superb panel, very diverse but very articulate, very 

capable and you really made your points well. And that’s extremely 

useful to us. 

We have a series of hearings we’re hoping to have on this issue, 

to go to the different states and find out what the problems are in 

various places. 

I am just very delighted with the testimony and the responses 

that we heard. I know there are a lot of people who are here that 

are interested and haven’t had a chance to speak. If anyone has a 

pressing need to talk to me afterwards, I will stick around for a 

little while and be happy to chat with you. 

But our objective, as I said at the beginning, is to make sure that 

every person in this nation who is legally entitled to vote can vote 

without encumbrance, and at the same time, make sure that their 

vote is not diluted by people or organizations who are diluting the 

vote by having illegal votes cast. So that is my objective, and I’m 

going to try to be as fair as I can about it. 

I certainly thank everyone here for their assistance. I thank Ms. 

Lofgren for coming out from California for this. And Representative 

Pearce was very helpful in organizing this session. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. I have a little—yes? 

Ms. LOFGREN. I would like to ask unanimous consent to submit 

several letters for the record, as well as the written statements 

from the witnesses. 

The CHAIRMAN. Fine. Thank you. 

[The information follows:] 

159 


Insert graphic folio 215 30169A.120
160 


Insert graphic folio 216 30169A.121
161 


Insert graphic folio 217 30169A.122
162 


Insert graphic folio 218 30169A.123
163 


Insert graphic folio 219 30169A.124
164 


Insert graphic folio 220 30169A.125
165 


Insert graphic folio 221 30169A.126
166 


Insert graphic folio 222 30169A.127
167 


Insert graphic folio 223 30169A.128
168 

The CHAIRMAN. I’ve got a little bookkeeping here to do before we 

close. 

First of all, I want to thank again our distinguished witnesses for 

their time, preparation and thoughtful comments. And it does take 

time to prepare the thoughtful comments you presented. 

And I appreciate the staffs of the various representatives for 

their work here and the additional work in setting up this hearing. 

I ask unanimous consent that members and witnesses have 

seven calendar days to submit material for the record, including 

additional questions of the witnesses, and for those statements and 

materials to be entered into the appropriate place in the record. 

Without objection, the material will be so entered. 

I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make technical and conformity changes on all matters considered by the committee at today’s hearing. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

My final comment, I agree with you in the three points you 

raised about the immigration bill. And I’m hopeful that we can— 

if we pass a bill, we can certainly take care of at least those three 

points. 

With that, once again, thank you very much. And the hearing is 

adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:14 a.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

Æ