[EL] When is a finger not a pen? Article discussing on-line digital signatures.

[Jack Cushman]

Interesting! Here's the part of the article that describes the procedure
we're talking about:

The firm, Allpoint Voter Services, “uses remote-control pens to transmit
> ‘signatures’ over the Internet.” After a voter enters information in an
> online form, he “signs” it with a stylus or finger on his screen. Allpoint
> transmits the “signature” to an autopen in California or Nevada, which
> transcribes the signature on to a paper voter registration form. Allpoint
> then mails the document to local election boards.


A complete description is available
here<http://www.nccivitas.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/05.pdf>,
including the fact that the online form they refer to is the standard
National Voter Registration Act form including state-specific instructions.

I'm more interested in whether that process works in general than whether
particular people are doing something shady (or outright breaking the law)
in North Carolina. But to begin with, this Civitas article is slanted to
the point of just being wrong. The core story they've put together is that
a contractor retained by the Obama campaign to run a voter registration
website contacted North Carolina's State Board of Elections to ask whether
the above procedure was lawful. The SBE's General Counsel prepared a legal
memo <http://www.nccivitas.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/05.pdf>concluding
that it was lawful under the NC Electronic Transactions Act and
stating that "Special Deputy Attorney General Susan Nichols has reviewed
and concurs in this opinion." Nichols later asked the General
Counsel<http://www.nccivitas.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/03.pdf>not
to use that language in the future because the AG's office no longer
allowed attorneys to state they concurred in opinions they didn't write.
She also said "I know we talked about the issue of the remote signing and I
agreed with your analysis, although I don't specifically recall reviewing
the final opinion." So as far as we know the process is lawful in North
Carolina according to the lawyers who reviewed it in both the SBE and AG's
office, and it resulted in some mail-in registrations being sent and
accepted.

There are a couple of anecdotes in there as well about individual incidents
that are possible in any sort of registration drive, and that might be
worth investigating if you enforce election law in North Carolina -- a
signature that didn't match, a person who was asked for unknown reasons to
print and mail her form, payments that might have been related to the
number of registrations obtained. But the core legal story is the above
paragraph plus a more than generous dose of innuendo.

So anyway, in terms of the general issues here --

-- Do people buy the argument that this remote-sign process is legal in
states that have adopted the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act? Has that
been tested?

-- Should this be legal? Is there a good reason to differentiate between a
form filled out by computer and signed with a touchscreen-controlled robot,
as opposed to a form filled out and signed with a pen? I assume we already
make that accommodation for disabled people, and digital or scanned
signatures are routine for relatively high-stakes business transactions  --
is there a reason to be wary of it here?

Curious to hear what y'all think.

--Jack

On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 11:09 AM, <bzall at aol.com> wrote:

> Hasn't appeared in the blog, so I'll ask about this article,
> http://www.philanthropydaily.com/nonprofits-behaving-badly/, about this
> report: http://www.nccivitas.org/2013/elections-bureaucrats-ran-amok/
>
>  Excerpt:
>
>  In a blatantly partisan move, the staff of the North Carolina State
> Board of Elections (SBE) successfully subverted state law to facilitate
> online voter registration in North Carolina by the 2012 Barack Obama
> campaign. In doing so they coordinated with partisans behind closed doors,
> lied about the NC Attorney General’s Office concurring with the SBE staff
> on the issue, and dodged oversight by their own board and the legislature.
> The end result was to add thousands of people to the North Carolina voter
> rolls illegally.
> The SBE staff’s audacity is so breath-taking that it’s hard to believe, so
> let us emphasize:  The Civitas Institute has documented how SBE bureaucrats
> conspired with a private company, working for the Obama campaign[i]<http://www.nccivitas.org/2013/elections-bureaucrats-ran-amok/#_edn1>,
> to facilitate a form of online voter registration for the 2012 General
> Election – in violation of state law. It’s a classic example of how
> bureaucrats ignore the democratic process and hijack an agency for partisan
> purposes.
>
>  Leaving aside the criticism of Jane Mayer (which some people argue is
> richly-deserved), I'm curious if there's another take on this actual voter
> registration procedure, or if it's as portrayed, particularly on the
> question of on-line signatures translated into a mailed document.
>
>  And the finger-based system does lend another meaning to the discussion
> over "digital democracy."
>
>  Barnaby Zall
> Of Counsel
> Weinberg, Jacobs & Tolani, LLP
> 10411 Motor City Drive, Suite 500
> Bethesda, MD 20817
> 301-231-6943 (direct dial)
> bzall at aol.com
> _____________________________________________________________
> U.S. Treasury Circular 230 Notice
>
> Any U.S. federal tax advice included in this communication (including
> any attachments) was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be
> used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding U.S. federal tax-related penalties
> or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
> tax-related matter addressed herein.
> _____________________________________________________________
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130301/499e6666/attachment.html>