This radio interview aired on the following Clear Channel Albany stations: WPYX (106.5), WTRY (98.3), WRVE (99.5) and WHRL (103.1) FM at 7 AM. WOFX (980) AM at 7 AM, WKKF (102.3) at 11:30 AM, and WGY (810) at 11:30 PM.
Reilly: "About 20 percent of the population, in any given state, has some kind of disability that they are living with, some more severe than others. There is an estimated 3 million at the low end that are of voting age and there is a good percentage of that are unable to vote the same way that you and I can vote, in privacy, on their own, which is part of our constitutional right. Joining me in studio today is Brad Williams, he is the Executive Director of the New York State Independent Living Council, and Brad this has become a big issue for your organization,"
Williams: " Thank you Laurie, yes it has. In fact, when you think about it in our history, or for any other issue, everything tends to flow from your right to vote as a citizen. So if you are denied your right to vote, you have been denied access to a lot of power. It makes it harder to pursue your point of view on issues."
Reilly: "Our basic fundamental right. Tell me a little about the New York State Independent Living Council, who you are and who you represent."
Williams: "We are funded and mandated through the Rehabilitation Act. Each state in the country has Statewide Independent Living Council. We do work on policy issues related to people with disabilities and also help support the statewide network of the independent living centers."
Reilly: "So from the very basic of helping people to live a normal life and access to public transportation, streets, buildings, all the way up to your right to vote, your rights in a work place and so fourth, those are just some of the areas."
Williams: "Correct, A to Z."
Reilly: "So that's everybody! And a lot of the people who run these programs are themselves disabled."
Williams: "Yes, the Rehabilitation Act mandates that more than 50 percent of the staff have to be people with disabilities and also your board. It allows for proper perspectives and representation."
Reilly: "So you've been saying since the formation of United States of America, there have always been barriers to some segment of the population historically when it comes to voting and some of that has been purposely to keep some people voting historically over time."
Williams: "It's very sad when you think of America. Back before 1828, men who did not own land or who were perhaps destitute were not allowed to vote. Woman, before 1920, were not allowed to vote. In fact, my father was born in 1920! Woman's voting rights were gained in his lifetime. It took people of color until 1965, a whole century after the Civil War, to get their opportunity to vote. Jim Crow laws and literacy tests created barriers that would just make it difficult for someone to go in and vote. Finally in 1971 you had young adults ages 18 to 20. They were old enough to go serve there country, but too young to vote. It helped to create the social divide that existed at the time. Our country has had these moments in time and what's sad is that we are at this moment right now, in the year 2005, for people with disabilities in the country and especially in New York State."
Reilly: "Alright, so let me ask you this, and it does seem like each hurdle that had to be overcome, it took a little less time than the hurdle before that, it took so many years to get to the woman's right to vote, but now we come to the people with disabilities. So I guess the logical first question for me is, why would the politicians want to keep people with disabilities from voting, is it premeditated?"
Williams: "Well, what happens is, there is this power of incumbency, and if you are incumbent what you want is the status quo. You want the status quo in your district because you know it is what got you elected in the first place. If you had a choice, you would probably like to see those dynamics stay the same to give you your best opportunity to stay elected in the future. So it comes down to this, election reform, what's the priority? Is it to make it more convenient and encourage access for all citizens to vote, or to tailor it so that people can perpetuate incumbencies and house majorities? That's really what's at the crux of this matter here. What our state lawmakers are grappling with, and what they really need to push, is to prioritize people, the citizens, not themselves."
Reilly: "So they help America to vote act, HAVA, as it's referred to, was finally passed in October of 2002 and it addresses not only New Yorkers with disabilities and Americans with disabilities, but there's a lot of other issues that are addressed in there, but how long did that process take and what part did people with disabilities have in finally getting that through."
Williams: "Well what ended up happening is that at the national level, advocates worked through the American Association on People with Disabilities and their national vote project leader, Jim Dixon, to help push for these changes. It was everyone's job to do what he or she could do within his or her state. For us, for instance, we had to convince the New York State Congressional Delegation, the representatives and senators, that this was something that needed to happen."
Reilly: "It seems almost like a ‘no brainer,’ I mean, how do you look at a person with a disability and say, as a politician, and say no, I'm not going to fight for your right to vote?"
Williams: "Well, you know, you can look at it and make certain assumptions about our constituency. Yet, people with disabilities have no socioeconomic boundaries. I mean you can be rich or poor; you can be from any culture, age, or gender. So wealthy republicans could have a disability just as much as maybe someone more independent minded or progressive thinking. Perhaps an independent or someone on the Democratic Party side."
Reilly: "Or the wealthy democratic side choice as well. So the help America vote act passed, but not a lot has changed in the State of New York. I'm looking at some results of complaints that were filed in the state of New York, just for this past election day, just a few month ago, and they are very specific things that seem basic. Now if you don't have a problem walking into a polling place and you can read the poll and you can pull down that clumsy lever, it might not seem like a big deal to you, but if you see some of these complaint...and you have them in front of you also?”
Williams: "Yes."
Reilly: "Go ahead, read some of them."
Williams: "Well, I think what's disturbing is that the complaints, I guess, address every aspect of voting. One complaint was for an individual that wanted to register to vote, but was told that they couldn't even register to vote because they couldn't read. That was in 2004 in this country. I can even share, it's not down there, but I can tell you that complaint came from White Plains."
Reilly: "In White Plains?"
Williams: "In White Plains! Now, for someone who chooses to vote by absentee ballot, there was an individual who had voted successfully this way for 7 years. They had voted successfully in the 2004 primary by absentee ballot. Yet, she/he began to get a little nervous when they didn't see the ballot arrive in the usual time frame. The person started to make weekly calls and was assured they would get their ballot in time. The ballot did not come in time, that person was not able to vote. Thus, she/he was denied their right to vote. It's staggering..."
Reilly: "I'm looking at several here that has to do with wheelchairs, and they cannot pull the lever because it is too high. So would this mean that you could not vote in private like everybody else? I see another one here, where a person was blind, and so the ballot had to be read to them and this process was conducted in front of everyone at the polling place instead of in privacy."
Williams: "Yeah, it's one thing to provide the service of reading back, especially for an affidavit ballot, of the choices and to confirm the persons selections, but not to say it out loud so that everyone in the room can hear and know how they are voting. Even physical barriers, like for one individual coming up to their polling place, finding a step and a sheet of three quarter inch plywood. She/he had to make the decision, health wise, do I dare navigate that or not, and they didn't."
Reilly: "So why didn't the State of New York get these policies in place in time enough for the election in 2004 in October?"
Williams: "Well, I think part of it has to do with what we had said earlier. You have the Senate and they are trying to hold on to their house majority. As it turned out, they lost 3 seats this Election Day, and almost a 4th. Senator Spano, actually ended up winning his seat, which he has held for many years. I truly believe that this threatens their security. They are trying to make sure that everything remains the status quo, including the language within election law. On the opposite side, to be fair, the Assembly has done some really good work on some language, but when it comes down to it, they're not necessarily willing to depart with a full face ballot because the Assembly races tend to be lower down on the ballot listing, and they are afraid of what is known as ‘fall off.’ A voter's interest could disappear when they get to their race."
Reilly: "So you believe that in spite of the federal law passed, that in the State of New York, politicians purposely dragged their feet on drafting the language. Why did they need to pass a bill if there was already a federal law?"
Williams: "The Senate side wants to maintain the status quo, while the Assembly wants to make sure change happens. This created the gap between the two. It just wasn't going to happen."
Reilly: "So you believe that is was on purpose?"
Williams: "I truly believe that it was intentional. Hopefully, they can get it together like their predecessors in 1828, 1920, 1965 and 1971, get their act together and actually put together election reform for people with disabilities in this state."
Reilly: "Alright that's coming up next, we're going to talk a little about the next step and also the technology that is out there that is presently soliciting the politicians saying, look it, here's the technology, pick one, we have this company, we have that company. I've been at a display myself where they asked the politician to come in and say look it, these are the different things, you need to pick one for the State of New York before another election goes by. Mean while, there's millions and millions of dollars waiting to come to the State of New York to implement these policies from the federal government that's just waiting and it's not happening yet. We'll get to all that coming up next. I'm Laura Reilly, and you're listening to Clear view on the radio stations of Clear Channel Albany."
Reilly: "My guest this week is Brad Williams. He is the executive director for the New York State Independent Living Council and your on fire about this particular issue, the very basic issue that a lot of us just take for granted and that is the right to vote for those with disabilities, the right for them to vote in privacy like everybody else. Now HAVA, the Help America Vote Act, passed in 2002, but New York State did not implement it in time enough for the federal election. I guess I'm confused Brad, help me out here, maybe others are too, why you have a federal act that's passed, why does the State of New York need to draft any new legislation? Why can't they just adopt what is the federal act? What is it that we need to do? Before we even get to all the technical parts of changing polling stations and adding new technology, which I know is out there and we'll talk about that in a minute, but why does the New York State have to change their election law first?"
Williams: "What happens is that in New York State, we have a situation where our election law is so outdated it creates the problem. Some of it goes back to another century and I make that joke because it's back to what was the 19th century in the late 1800's. Some of our election law goes back that far and it's been changed and adapted and not necessarily done in the best way over time. For example, ballot language talks about frames with white paper backgrounds with print in black ink. What does black ink have to do with the electronic machines of today? It's just our elected officials have had this reluctance to really look at election law and change it in a comprehensive way that makes sense, that updates it to today."
Reilly: "But they have to change it; there is a federal act that has been passed."
Williams: "It's part of this whole problem. Whenever situations come up where they need to make changes, our elected officials tend to do it in the most minimal way, and it doesn't really put things in the best context. I believe that when you do that, that's what creates the misinterpretations at the local level, that's what makes it hard for someone at the local level to understand what needs to be done. If they amend the law like they should, in a comprehensive way so people could figure it out, then you would have more consistency and fewer problems at polling places."
Reilly: "Alright, so the next step is, we have to encourage maybe through a lawsuit, to get the politicians to get there work done to be able to implement the federal law into the state law, is that about it?"
Williams: "Very quick background on this. We have worked hard over the past few years to try to make things happen, providing testimony, draft language, position papers, and attending meetings, etc. When it didn't happen, folks were frustrated and had a protest. A month later, I was able to meet with Bill Brown, who was the attorney who successfully litigated the Tennessee vs. Lane case before the US Supreme Court. We had a 2-hour conversation. In the end, he said in his southern accent, ‘What you need is a bunch of George Lanes.’ We took his advice. We set up a process where we provided training and support so that people could pull down a complaint form to file or even file the complaint electronically. We are at the stage right now with this report where we are trying to educate our elected leaders and say look at this. It is terrible. I mean this is shameful for New York State to have these types of situations. Do the right thing. If they don't do the right thing, then 92 complainants can very quickly become 92 plaintiffs."
Reilly: "And so what has the Senate’s response been to this report? It just came out March 1st?"
Williams: "It came out March 1st. I know Assemblyman Kevin Cahill made reference to it in the first HAVA conference committee meeting several times. He distributed copies of it to the conferees. So they know about the report now."
Reilly: "How passionate are the New Yorkers living with disabilities about this right to vote in private?"
Williams: "They had that protest last year. In fact, some people were initially shocked by it. However, when you have been denied your right to vote for over 200 years, I mean why wouldn't someone have that reaction? I think we're at a point where people are sick and tired of not getting into polling places. People are sick and tired of not being able to see the voting choices or being able to reach them. They do not want a republican election official or a democratic election official standing behind them as they are getting their assistance to vote. Can you imagine if we reversed the situation? How about achieving ‘equality' by making all citizens vote with a republican and democratic official standing behind them at the machine. Would everyone find that acceptable? I don't think so, and it's time to put an end to it."
Reilly: "Let's talk about the technology for just a moment. I understand first we have to get the New York State election laws in order, but then we have to, and there is money coming in to implement these changes, there's already 66 million dollars, waiting in escrow, from my understanding, it's just there, waiting and we're not using it. The state can also get 153 million dollars for new voting machines that also depend on legislative action. So all this money is waiting. It’s not a matter of gee, we don't have the money to implement this federal law, that's not the case."
Williams: "No, in fact, it's not what many people have called an ‘unfunded mandate.’ This is a funded mandate with very clear language. Gracia Hillman, the new chairperson of the Election Assistance Commission, spoke at a national vote summit in February this year. We asked her a question at the end about New York's funding if the state didn’t comply? When would it finally disappear? She talked about the first benchmark of January 1st 2006, which is closing in upon us fast, when the state would have to have its statewide database completed. She then talked about the first primary in 2006. If polling places or machines weren’t accessible, then it would trigger the Department of Justice coming in and demanding a corrective action plan. I don't think DOJ would accept anything beyond a year after that date. If New York still couldn't get their act together, then that's when she said the state would start losing it money. This would shift the financial cost back to taxpayers in New York State."
Reilly: "So taxpayers should be up in arms about this as well. Now as far as the technology goes, because I do the Tech Valley update, I get all the technology press releases and so forth. So about a month ago, I went down to the Empire State Plaza to view for myself a new way of voting and the company had set it up right down there in the north concourse so that the politicians could come down and look. I know there are many kinds of machines. Some states have already implemented new voting technology. I happen to see what was they referred to as the paper ballot optical scan system because there is a problem with some of the systems where if it was just computer and touch screen, I wanted a print out of what I did so that there is a paper trail so to speak. This particular one you can take any piece of paper, any kind of ballot that different companies might have, you feed it into the machine to scan it. The person with the disability has a choice. They could listen to it being read to them through two headphones in their own privacy, or they could read it themselves on the screen with a simple touch. They also have both the mouse was a simple button, or they could touch the screen. There was a lot different ways to access the machine in case someone’s wheelchair couldn't get close enough to reach the screen. There was a mouse that could be placed right on their wheelchair. Then they could zoom it in, or they could listen to it. You one little touch, you could vote, and then read it back. It printed out the ballot when done. So that's just one example. The technology is out there. They even had a Braille keypad. It seemed to be ideal for people with a lot of different disabilities. What I'm saying is the technology seems to be out there."
Williams: "Right, and I believe that people with disabilities would say at this point they are looking for any technology or any system that will in fact provide them full access to the machine, the ballot and the polling place. Generally speaking there is the physical access issues in terms of reach and then there's ballot issues where you might need to increase the size of the text or change in terms of contrast, and then there's also the audio feedback. Those are some of the general aspects that must be in any voting technology in order to have a chance of being accessible."
Reilly: "We have about 30 seconds left Brad, what can listeners do to help the New York State Independent Living Council on this issue?"
Williams: "What they can do is call their elected officials and say it's time they finally amended New York State Election Law to encourage access to vote, because election systems are often designed to last for decades and the baby boomer population, which is a third of this country, is going to significantly increase and age out. As a result, our systems better be prepared now and in the future."
Reilly: "Thank you very much Brad Williams, Executive Director of the New York State Independent Living Council. I'm Laura Reilly and you have been listening to Clear View a public affairs production of Clear Channel Albany."