A CONVENTION DELEGATE'S REPORT
Revolutionary is rarely a word chosen to describe the LWV, but in the sense that sudden, unexpected change characterized the 46th National Convention, this might be the most appropriate descriptor of events. On June 12 delegates amended the Convention Rules to permit consideration of program resolutions not submitted prior to Convention. Eight proposals were brought before the Convention, three of which particularly impact the LWVMP.
Illinois delegates requested a concurrence with the Illinois LWV on abolition of the death penalty. This issue was mentioned as a possible Convention priority at the LWVMP annual meeting. Discussion against the motion emphasized two principles: approval would circumvent grassroots input on this national stance and some Leagues have conducted studies and not arrived at a local consensus. The motion failed to achieve the two-thirds majority required for passage with 305 of 699 votes cast opposing the motion. Clearly, if Leagues desire a national position on this issue, grassroots studies must be forthcoming.
The LWV of Oakland, CA, submitted a motion that "LWVUS focus on the urgent need to defend civil liberties by making the League's position on individual liberties and citizen's right to know the highest priorities for education and advocacy." This motion was extensively debated with pro advocates citing the nation-wide threats to civil liberties embodied in the PATRIOT Act, a national concern about these threats, and the possibility that LWVUS action on this issue will attract membership growth and revitalization. By contrast, con advocates argued that other organizations, such as the ACLU, are already addressing this issue effectively. Therefore, LWVUS advocacy would require new national resources and time to develop programs, and this might be an example of the delegates instructing the Board too narrowly. The motion carried on a voice vote; however, motions on the following day to increase the PMP by either $2.45 or $1.15 failed. The end result is that an unfunded mandate has been passed to the Board, and the impact of this on other program priorities remains uncertain.
Finally, the issue of Direct Electronic Voting (DRE) was the primary impetus for the rules change and occupied a major portion of the Convention's attention on the floor of Plenary Sessions, in caucuses, and in delegate discussions over drinks and dinner. An extensive reporting of issue pros and cons is appropriate for future Voter issues or a LWVMP membership discussion, but the mandate from Convention is presented below.
The effort to amend the LWVUS position that a voter verified paper trail (VVPT) is not necessary for DRE voting was well-organized prior to Convention and led by the Minnesota delegation. The motion to change this LWVUS program position was amended by a standing vote to read, "In order to ensure integrity and voter confidence in elections, the LWVUS supports the implementation of voting systems and procedures that are secure; accurate; recountable; and accessible." The intention of the motion as described by advocates is to give each state League the opportunity to pursue the individual needs of that electorate, and the change does NOT advocate or establish a policy that requires a VVPT. Persuasive arguments to support DRE voting without a VVPT were presented by Georgia, which uses DRE voting exclusively, and other regions that have experience with this technology, and these views are worthy of careful consideration and deliberation.
Subsequent to Convention, LWVUS has clarified the impact of this policy change. The League neither supports nor opposes any type of technology per se, such as DRE machines, VVPT, or optical scan ballots. LWVUS President Kay Maxwell writes, "Local Leagues may advocate for the four criteria, but it would not be appropriate to advocate for or against a type of technology, as indicated above, since that would be inflexible and would undermine technological innovation."
In conclusion, as revolutionary as LWVUS might ever become, the Convention accepted the challenge of platform changes from grassroots motions; and in some cases delegates were swayed by the passion of the cause and in others they weighed in with pragmatic and principled decisions - all of which testifies to the vitality and commitment of each League and delegate.
