Dear Committee Members,
I deeply regret that I am unable to testify in person at today's hearing
because of serious health problems. Please consider the following as my written
testimony. I am writing this letter as a concerned California voter, an
attorney, and a woman with multiple disabilities. For purposes of this letter, I am
only representing myself, and I do not claim to speak for anyone else.

    I have researched and thoughtfully considered the issues regarding
electronic voting and I enthusiastically support SB 1723. I understand that
well-meaning advocates are speaking out pronouncing that electronic voting will
revolutionize people with disabilities access to voting.

I am particularly offended by the reoccurring claim that people with
disabilities are disenfranchised. This is highly inflammatory rhetoric, ignoring the
definition of enfranchisement, which is a person's right to vote. When I turned
18, I became enfranchised. Not having the ability to vote without another
human being's assistance is the reality that I deal with, but does not make me
disenfranchised. I rely on other people to help me with tasks that I am not
physically able to do, but I remain in control and independently thinking the
entire time. When voting, I can choose to bring a friend, a family member, or ask
one of the well-trained poll workers for assistance.

    California voting regulations allow people with disabilities to ask two
assistants to help them cast their vote, thereby providing a supervision
component. Access to private voting technology will be a wonderful enhancement of my
right to vote, but only when such technology is secure and dependable.
Because I am blind and I have manual dexterity impairments, I will be an
enthusiastic user of the future DRE (touchscreen) system equipped with secure,
paper-verified receipts. I have done the research, and I know that such technology is in
development with audio transmittal of both the text on the screen and the
printer output.

The Help America Vote Act (HAVA) requires assistive technology be available
in wheelchair accessible polling sites by the year 2006. The HAVA Commission's
recent report chronicles many problems with DRE systems and fails to provide
readily achievable solutions for November election preparation.

The authors of SB 1723 clearly recognized the needs of people with
disabilities by requiring the Secretary of State to provide audio-recorded state ballot
pamphlets on both audio tapes and CDs. It is my personal experience that
assistive technology continues to improve and gain my trust.

       A dozen years ago, during law school, I obtained a PC with
text-to-speech software, enabling me to hear what appeared on the screen as I wrote
papers or did my own legal research on the Internet. After four or five years, this
DOS-based system became obsolete as Windows-based, highly-visual systems
became industry standard. Then, a couple years later, a text-to-speech
Windows-based program came on the market and I was once again able to use my computer.

    Now, because of my diminished manual dexterity, I await development of an
effective voice-recognition system that will work compatibly with my
text-to-speech system. I know that such software is being developed, but I have heard
manufacturers say that it is a small market demanding such technology.
Therefore, they do not devote many resources to such projects.

     In contrast, America Online (AOL) provides their customers with the
ability to check their e-mail via telephone, enabling me to listen to my e-mail
correspondence. AOL created this useful technology to help their huge customer
base check their e-mail remotely, but the advancement also incidentally
assisted people with visual impairments.

       The DRE systems have a potentially enormous customer base and are
being developed rapidly because of this HAVA-inspired market. Providing flawed DRE
systems would erode trust among voters with disabilities as well as
able-bodied voters in California and throughout the country. If Californians depend on
flawed systems, and California has problems in November, the headlines
throughout the country will undoubtedly reflect this horrible fact.

     Other disability rights advocates claim that decertification would be a
step back, treating people with disabilities as second class citizens. I argue
that requiring California voters to use dangerously flawed DREs will be
forcing second rate technology on us all.

       I know that DRE system developers are working tirelessly to create
dependable secure systems, and I am confident that one day I will be able to vote
privately without assistance. However, I refuse to act as a complaining
passenger in the backseat asking, are we there yet? I know I will be there soon
enough, but I only want to arrive safely and with everyone on board. I know that
when SB 1723 is passed, you will be heroes for all the citizens of California,
especially voters with disabilities.

Natalie Wormeli, Esq.
Testimony before the California State Senate Elections and Reapportionment
Committee, May 5, 2004