INSPECTION OF VOTING MACHINES On the afternoon of October 14, staff representatives of the Committee, accompanied by representatives of the Tulsa County Election Board, Mr. Gene Gallagher, Programmer used by Tulsa County, and representatives of Mr. Edmondson and Mr. Bellmon, physically inspected the voting machines. The voting machines were stored in an open warehouse, along with other miscellaneous materials. No special screening or compartmentation was afforded the machines; and, at this time, the contents of the warehouse were in the process of being transferred to other storage. Mr. McDonald, Secretary of the Election Board, advised that the machines had only been in this location for a couple of weeks and prior to that time they had been stored in segregated, secure storage areas. He also explained that the machines were all locked and that keys to the machines were at all times stored in the vault at the Tulsa County Election Board headquarters. The Staff members requested and subsequently examined seven voting machines; five of the "Tulsa" type and two of the "Amarillo" type. machines were unlocked and set up as they had been at the conclusion of the November 5, 1974, general election. Photographs of the backs of the machines which contained the public counters are attached. (Attachment No. 14) With a view toward establishing whether or not voters who had attempted to follow the straight party voting instructions as nearly as they could (such instructions indicating that a bottom lever be placed on the party symbol), an uncontested race with a Democratic candidate and no Republican candidate but with the party symbols in place at the bottom of the ballot was selected to determine if individuals had moved a selector to the Republican symbol and attempted to vote a straight party ticket in this manner. (See Attachment No. 15.) It was found that no counter was attached to the Republican symbol and, therefore, no record of any possible votes cast in that particular location was recorded. Mr. Gallagher, the programmer, advised that there should be a "stop" located at this point so the selector could not be moved to the Republican symbol. However, examination indicated that no such stop was in place. Mr. Moore, Chief Clerk of the Election Board, advised that it was his feeling that there should not be a stop at this location as no candidate was named and there would be no reason for having such a stop. CHARGES OF IMPROPER PRESSURES An issue which it is felt deserves the attention of the Committee developed during the course of the initial staff investigation in Tulsa. Mr. Royse Parr, Vice Chairman and Republican Member of the Tulsa County Election Board, requested an opportunity to appear and present a statement to members of the staff. This request was, of course, granted and Mr. Parr presented a statement (Attachment No. 16) alleging that subsequent to the election and after Mr. Edmondson had filed his protest extreme pressures were brought to bear on Mr. McDonald, the Secretary of the Tulsa County Election Board, by un-named Democrats to have him "play ball" with Mr. Edmondson. Threats were allegedly made that if he did not cooperate with Mr. Edmondson's protest that he was in danger of losing his job and that he should take the Fifth Amendment at any proceedings resulting from the protest. Mr. McDonald, after consulting counsel, was asked to provide details of these threats. Mr. McDonald advised that the threats were not what he considered unusual but rather what you would expect after a close election contest. He stated he received these threats at his home by telephone and that he could not identify those responsible. He stated that everything in Mr. Parr's statement was true regarding these threats but that he did not place much emphasis on them. He advised he was certain Mr. Edmondson would not be involved in such activities. In fairness, counsel for Mr. Edmondson and Mr. Bellmon were asked if they cared to comment concerning this matter. Counsel for Mr. Edmondson advised that it was of great concern to him that such charges would be made and that such charges smacked of dirty tricks designed to discredit Mr. Edmondson. Counsel for Mr. Edmondson advised that Mr. Edmondson categorically denied such charges and stated there was absolutely no truth in them. Counsel for Mr. Edmondson also advised that he was concerned that officers of the Election Board and officers of the Court would be aware of such threats and that they had not surfaced them until nine months after the election had been conducted. If true, it would seem to representatives of the staff that such charges constitute possible violations of law in connection with a federal election. It is recommended the Committee consider the appropriateness of referring this matter to the Department of Justice or other governmental entity with jurisdiction to investigate the substance of the charges and provide for dispostion of the matter in accordance with established legal procedures. ERRONEOUS CERTIFICATES OF VOTES The official certificates of votes for the 315 precincts in Tulsa County contain a multiplicity of errors, either human or machine, which cast doubt upon the procedures employed and the maintenance of the controls required to insure proper elections. All the machines used in Tulsa County have a "public counter" which is used to determine the number of persons who have voted on the machine. In order to be certain that this is a true figure, the programmer sated that the public counter registers "0" when the machines are delivered for an election. As a final check, each precinct is to provide, on the official Certificates of Votes, the votes recorded on the public counter which may be checked against the number of persons signing the register books before voting. Obviously, there should not be more persons voting than had signed to vote. In Tulsa County, 25 precincts failed to provide the public counter totals for the machines used in their precincts. In 115 precincts, the public counter totals exceed the number of signatures recorded. In 27 precincts, the number of signatures exceed the public counter totals. Where no public counter totals were provided, there is no way to check the accuracy or propriety of voting procedures. For example, in Precinct #137, there were no public counter totals recorded, and while there were 355 persons signing the voting books, there were 361 votes recorded in the Senate race, as well as the race for Governor. Of the 115 precincts where public counter totals exceed signatures recorded, only 6 were explained by persons at the precincts on the certificates. It might be suggested that other deviations may have been caused by repairs or work done during the election by the programmer. This assumption may not easily be accepted, since the "Voting Machine Service Call" reports by the programmer do not provide sufficient bases for accepting such assumptions. Of these, There were approximately 69 service cails recorded. 20 were at precincts where there were no deviations between the public counter totals and number of signatures, and 8 were at precints where the signatures were greater than the public counter totals. Only 34 precincts received service calls where the public counter outnumbered the signatures, and of these 5 were explained by the precinct workers' certificates. (The other explanation was at a precinct where no service call work sheet had been made.) The service call work sheets do not indicate if the public counter was tripped during repairs. In any event, at least 71 precincts where no service calls were made had higher public counter totals than signatures. Add to these the 25 precincts with no public counter totals, over 30% of the precincts provide unreliable results. In addition, there were other precincts where the returns show clear errors and irregularities. For example: In Precinct #216, the Certificate notes that machine Precinct #218. There were 389 signatures reported and 394 votes recorded on the public counter, with 390 votes recorded in the Senate race and the race for Governor. Precinct #254. There were 477 signatures, but 478 votes recorded in the race for Governor. Precinct #553. More votes were recorded for Senator and for Governor than on the public counter. The following is a list of those precincts with improper or no recorded totals: |