To the Editor:

Apparently, just like during the Pay Raise scandal, when it comes to choosing voting machines, our elected leaders have decided that if the Constitution and our laws are inconvenient, they can simply ignore them.

At a recent Bucks County Commissioner meeting, we pointed out certain facts.

First, the Pennsylvania Constitution, in Article VII, Section Six, specifically states that the use of voting machines is permitted “at the option of the electors.”  This means the voters have the right to decide on voting machines.

Second, the Pennsylvania Election Code at 25 P.S. 3031.2 specifically states that a county may authorize the use of an electronic voting system “by a majority vote of its qualified registered electors.” Again, this means that it is the voters -- not the Commissioners -- who get to decide about whether or not to switch to electronic voting machines.
 
Third, the Governor’s Voting Modernization Task Force concluded that “the question of electronic voting must be placed on the ballot countywide or by municipality, and pass by majority vote before the jurisdiction may use an electronic voting system.”
 
Fourth, there is nothing in the federal Help America Vote Act (known as “HAVA”), which rescinds or cancels out the requirement of a referendum.  In fact, after HAVA was passed, the state legislature approved Act 150, which preserved the requirement of a referendum and actually made it easier to hold referenda in a timely manner. 
 
Indeed, HAVA actually provides for voting with paper ballots and other non-electronic systems. There is simply no need to force a decision on questionable electronic machines until the systems are approved by the voters of Bucks County.  We can save money, protect the integrity of our vote, and, significantly, comply with both HAVA and our state constitution and laws.
 
At their last meeting of the year, the Republican Commissioners complained that they have run out of time to perform the constitutionally and legally required referendum allowing the people to have their say.  Whose fault is that?  They could have placed the issue on the ballot at any of the last six elections at no cost to the taxpayers.  HAVA and our state’s provisions for voter approval of electronic voting systems are not incompatible. We the people should not lose our rights because of mismanagement by those who run the County.
 
It is ridiculous for Republican Commissioner Charlie Martin and the County’s Chief Operating Officer, David Sanko, to claim that the idea of a referendum is merely a partisan ploy, and that they were blinded-sided by the suggestion.  The democratic process is no ploy; it is the very foundation of our society.  That is why, as the Governor’s Task Force concluded, “Pennsylvania has placed its trust in its citizens to judge which voting system is right for them.”  Martin and Sanko should understand this.  They served on the Governor’s Task Force and signed off on its conclusions.  The question for Messrs. Martin and Sanko is, do you still trust the citizens of Bucks County to judge which voting system is right for them?

The Bucks County Democratic Committee represents almost 160,000 voters. We clearly have a right to ask why two of the authors of the Governor’s Voting Modernization Task Force Final Report, have -- thus far -- failed to hold a referendum.  If they continue on the same course, they will be failing to comply with their own recommendations, failing to follow the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Pennsylvania Election Code, failing to respect our society’s fundamental democratic principles, and they will be failing to trust the citizens of Bucks County.  We the people deserve better.

Jordan B. Yeager
Counsel, Bucks County Democratic Committee