Comments on: More NVRA Nonsense http://blog.champaigncountyclerk.com/2010/03/22/more-nvra-nonsense/ Champaign County Clerk Blog Tue, 14 Jun 2011 12:53:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Champaign County Clerk http://blog.champaigncountyclerk.com/2010/03/22/more-nvra-nonsense/comment-page-1/#comment-2185 Champaign County Clerk Tue, 23 Mar 2010 14:24:52 +0000 http://blog.champaigncountyclerk.com/?p=368#comment-2185 Joyce, the NC law is much like the Illinois law. if there is no match, ID has to be provided the first time they vote. But that is not the issue here. The issue here is whether a person can be removed in Champaign County if their name shows up in DuPage county, Illinois with the same name, same birthday, and same driver's license. what Project vote is suggesting is that I have to write them a letter, have it returned, write them a forwardable letter, move them to inactive status and then keep them on the inactive rolls for two general federal elections. that was certainly not the intent of HAVA. Joyce, the NC law is much like the Illinois law. if there is no match, ID has to be provided the first time they vote.

But that is not the issue here. The issue here is whether a person can be removed in Champaign County if their name shows up in DuPage county, Illinois with the same name, same birthday, and same driver’s license.

what Project vote is suggesting is that I have to write them a letter, have it returned, write them a forwardable letter, move them to inactive status and then keep them on the inactive rolls for two general federal elections. that was certainly not the intent of HAVA.

]]> By: Joyce McCloy http://blog.champaigncountyclerk.com/2010/03/22/more-nvra-nonsense/comment-page-1/#comment-2184 Joyce McCloy Tue, 23 Mar 2010 02:45:32 +0000 http://blog.champaigncountyclerk.com/?p=368#comment-2184 Oh noes! Mark you and I disagree on this one. I the activist, you the administrator. In North Carolina, until 2007 citizens voter registrations were blocked if the voters failed to match the databases. While Joe Smith might match perfectly with the DMV database, he might fail to match the social security database. What your readers might not be aware of, Mark, and correct me if I'm wrong, a voter registration application asks for the last 4 digits of the person's social security number, not the entire number. This means that some people will have the same last 4 numbers that are submitted to the SS database for matching. In North Carolina, we found that about 20% of records submitted failed to match. With the DMV database it was much lower. The Social Security Dept does not provide a reason for the failure to match either. In 2007 we changed our law to use matching as an administrative tool, rather than a barrier, since matching databases proved to be faulty. So if a voter fails to match, our BoE assigns them a unique identifying number (mentioned in HAVA) and also flags that voter record to request voter id (as per NC law) for the first time the voter votes. The BoE also tries to contact the voter to give them the opportunity to correct the problem by presenting additional proof of id etc. Very few states enacted such a "no match no vote" policy. I believe in keeping accurate voting records but the social security database was not set up with the intent of being used this way, nor is the SS dept accountable to explain the failure to match. Imagine being a qualified voter, a person with a valid right to register to vote, and because of a database error or a clerical error, you were blocked from registering to vote. Oh noes! Mark you and I disagree on this one. I the activist, you the administrator.

In North Carolina, until 2007 citizens voter registrations were blocked if the voters failed to match the databases. While Joe Smith might match perfectly with the DMV database, he might fail to match the social security database.

What your readers might not be aware of, Mark, and correct me if I’m wrong, a voter registration application asks for the last 4 digits of the person’s social security number, not the entire number. This means that some people will have the same last 4 numbers that are submitted to the SS database for matching. In North Carolina, we found that about 20% of records submitted failed to match. With the DMV database it was much lower. The Social Security Dept does not provide a reason for the failure to match either.

In 2007 we changed our law to use matching as an administrative tool, rather than a barrier, since matching databases proved to be faulty. So if a voter fails to match, our BoE assigns them a unique identifying number (mentioned in HAVA) and also flags that voter record to request voter id (as per NC law) for the first time the voter votes. The BoE also tries to contact the voter to give them the opportunity to correct the problem by presenting additional proof of id etc.

Very few states enacted such a “no match no vote” policy.

I believe in keeping accurate voting records but the social security database was not set up with the intent of being used this way, nor is the SS dept accountable to explain the failure to match.

Imagine being a qualified voter, a person with a valid right to register to vote, and because of a database error or a clerical error, you were blocked from registering to vote.

]]>