What happened to CAL-ACCESS? Reporters ask, SoS explains

Over the last few days there have been numerous stories about the failure of the Cal-Access online campaign finance disclosure system, operated by the California Secretary of State. The LA Times quotes Derek Cressman of Common Cause calling for hearings, and the Sacramento Bee interviewed Secretary of State Debra Bowen who stated, "We want to get it up as soon as possible, but we also want to complete the fix that will be the most stable over time."

Today, Chris Reynolds, head of the Secretary of State's Political Reform Division, sent around a document explaining why their technical staff believes Internet access to the system went down and what they are doing to restore Internet access to the system as quickly as possible. His email also says the his office is available to assist people in the meantime by phone, email, fax, or in-person visit.  The main number is (916) 653-6224, email address is http://www.sos.ca.gov/webcontact/general/question.aspx, fax is (916) 653-5045, street address is 1500 11th Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.

Here is the memo:

---------

What happened to CAL-ACCESS?

CAL-ACCESS (the California Automated Lobbying and Campaign Contribution and Expenditure Search System) is a suite of applications developed in 13 different programming languages.  CAL-ACCESS runs on a server cluster and associated components that are more than 12 years old, and runs on an uncommon version of the Unix operating system called Tru64.

On November 30, 2011, the disk array controller experienced a physical memory failure that led to the loss of its disk array configuration and the loss of three physical disk drives.  The disk array contains a total of 90 disk drives with 15 disk drives installed in each of six drive enclosures.  (The array configuration defines which combination of physical disk drives form the logical disk drive that is presented to the operating system.)  When CAL-ACCESS was originally architected in 1999, it was common to locate the operating system on the disk array rather than on locally attached disks.  This configuration created a single point of failure in the array controller.

After replacing the failed memory equipment, staff were able to reconfigure a very small portion of the disk array that permitted the server cluster to start.  The portion of the disk array that houses the area where the databases reside was not immediately recovered since a more extensive amount of time was needed to remap the entire disk array.  To make the system available by Internet again as soon as possible, staff ported the server cluster to use an alternate network-attached storage device and used a backup to restore the data by December 7.  The configuration functioned for about 30 hours before it failed again on December 9.  Staff tried multiple approaches to recover this configuration throughout Friday, Saturday and Sunday.

On Monday, December 12, staff initiated three concurrent recovery methods to restore services: 

1. Porting CAL-ACCESS off of the Tru64 cluster to a modern hardware architecture, which involves modifying the database and reprogramming websites and applications in as many as 13 different coding languages.

2. Virtualizing the Tru64 Unix environment to move off of the aged equipment, which includes building new servers and installing and configuring software that can emulate the DEC Alpha architecture to run on an Intel architecture.  Once this environment has been established the Tru64 operating system can be installed and configured to match the old production environment, and the databases and applications can be restored from backup.

3. Rebuilding the original disk array, which is expected to take 10 to 14 days.

Work on the first method started on December 12.  The second and third methods require contracted specialists and a state contract approval is expected by December 15. 

Then will CAL-ACCESS be permanently fixed?

Created in 1999, CAL-ACCESS is now very old and fragile, and few people in the United States are familiar with the antiquated technology used to build and operate the system.  The recovery efforts will make CAL-ACCESS stable and get it running, but it can never be more robust or feature-laden.  Ideally, we need a fresh start with an all-new CAL-ACCESS.  

State election websites assessed in new nationwide Pew study

Today the Pew Center on the States unveiled a new, nationwide assessment of state election websites, "Being Online Is Still Not Enough."

The California Voter Foundation was a major partner in this project and undertook much of the basic research, analysis, and writing, along with the Center for Governmental Studies and the Nielsen Norman Group. Together our three organizations conducted this assessment, which reviewed all 50 states' and the District of Columbia's election websites for content, lookup tools and usability.

An article I co-wrote for electionline.org, was published today, providing additional details about this important project. It's also available via CVF-NEWS.

Unfortunately, California does not score well in the assessment, primarily due to the fact that our state election website lacks all five of the voter lookup tools the project assessed (voter registration status, polling place, ballot information, and absentee and provisional ballot status).

While many other states have made great progress in recent years utilizing the Internet as an effective and efficient tool to help voters engage in elections, California is lagging behind. At CVF we are working with a number of individuals and organizations to promote a statewide voter registration status lookup tool and hope that someday soon California voters will have as good, if not better access to modern election tools as voters in other states.

It is our hope that this study will help states better understand how their election websites compare to one another, provide useful feedback and ultimately help more voters participate more effectively and meaningfully in the democratic process.

Remembering a hero of California elections

Yesterday a longtime friend and mentor, Tim Hodson, passed away. His departure will leave a giant hole in the fields of elections, government, voting, redistricting, and political reform. His long career in public service is covered by Robert Davila in today's Sacramento Bee.

I knew Tim in so many capacities - most recently as a member of the Fair Political Practices Commission, where he led a project to modernize California's disclosure laws.

Tim was that kind of quiet public servant who just assumed it was normal to work for the general public good - an attitude that stood out in a town where so many people are working for special, not public interests. That's one reason why Tim's commitment to public service stands out so brightly.

I knew Tim for many years, starting back in 1990 when I was working for California Common Cause and Tim was the senior consultant to the Senate Elections Committee. Tim always made time for me, and cared about the issues on our plate.

One of the best parts of my job with Common Cause was working with Ruth Holton, who would later marry Tim and end up living about a block away from my home. I'd sometimes run into Ruth or Tim at our neighborhood market and hear about their plans for dinner that night.

Those simple things, like enjoying a meal with a loved one, deserve to be cherished. Ruth urged her friends and family to treasure those moments and take joy in the simple pleasures of life. It's good advice. I'm going to try to remember it in Tim's honor.

Lively discussion marks 100th anniversary of CA direct democracy

We are rapidly approaching the 100 year anniversary of the California initiative process, an occasion celebrated by some and scorned by others. The centennial of the Golden State’s system of direct democracy is provoking many to rethink this process and consider whether it needs an upgrade.

Many groups are sponsoring polls, public forums and debates, conducting research and cooking up ideas for reform.  But probably no event will be like the one Zocalo Public Square sponsored with New America Foundationand the Bill Lane Center for the American West at San Francisco’s Fort Mason Center last week.

I had the honor of sharing the stage with several people who, like me, have taken some time to think seriously (and occasionally humorously, thankfully) about how the initiative process works. Author and New America Fellow Joe Mathews moderated our panel and brought his lightening fast quips to our spirited discussion. My favorite Mathews line was when he compared enacting initiatives to “adding another room to the Winchester mystery house”.  

Bruno Kaufmann, president of the Initiative and Referendum Institute Europe, traveled the farthest to participate. He is a strong proponent of direct democracy for Europe and is involved in the EU’s European Citizen Initiative. That’s why his observation that California is the only place in the world where we need less direct democracy was so astonishing to me. He also observed that California initiatives are about creating and mirroring conflict, not solving it, which I found to be a highly true and astute perspective, the kind you can only get from someone like Kaufmann who has studied direct democracy in many states and nations.

Perhaps the most surprising panelist was James Fowler, medical geneticist and political scientist from UC San Diego.  At first, I could not figure out what a medical geneticist might have to say about direct democracy. Plenty, it turned out. Fowler studies decision-making, has researched the genetic roots of political ideology, and discussed how social networking sites are extensions of real networks and may be the key in successfully moving toward an online signature gathering platform for initiative campaigns.

Perhaps the most enthusiastic advocate for California’s initiative process was Paul Jacob of the Citizens in Charge Foundation. His organization led term limits initiative campaigns in California and several other states, and he believes California’s process works well (particularly in comparison to the majority of U.S. states, which have no initiative process). But he is concerned about the future of California’s initiative process, especially the way our Legislature deals with it, which he called “vindictive” (his case in point, passing a last-minute bill at the end of session that would prohibit initiatives from being placed on Primary election ballots).

My comments focused on the need to move toward publicized disclosure, and how the California Voter Foundationpromotes reforms to ensure information about the top donors in initiative campaigns is readily available to voters when they are asked to sign initiative petitions; when they consult their ballot pamphlets; and when they cast their ballots. 

I also pointed out that on average only one in three initiatives pass, and we would serve voters better by treating the initiative process as the people’s lawmaking arena and ensuring voters have the access to the same kind of information lawmakers have when they vote on bills, such as knowing who the true sponsor of a measure is.

I anticipated a lively, engaged audience and was not disappointed! There were tons of great questions, and the discussion continued over cocktails and music well past the official end time.

Zocalo events aren’t over when the day is done. Zocalo staff write up a review of the session, called “The Takeaway”, post event photos, and make podcasts and video archives of every event. Zocalo deserves kudos for innovating a new kind of public forum for California’s communities that is engaging, interactive and much needed.

Patt Morrison Asks - LA Times interview

On Saturday I was honored to be featured in Patt Morrison's column in the Los Angeles Times. Excerpts are below.
-------

What's a nice girl like you doing in a mess like this?

I love elections; I grew up with elections. My dad ran for Culver City City Council when I was 7. Election night, we had a big party and my dad was the underdog and someone was on the phone getting the numbers and I [wrote] the numbers on the chalkboard. To me, politics has been about community service.

You also learned about the political version of trick or treat.

Someone showed up at the door with a $500 [campaign contribution] check. For a Culver City election, that was a lot of money. My dad sent him away. He said: "I don't know that man, I don't want to know him and I don't want him to think I owe him anything." My first lesson in how money in politics works!

We have former Secretary of State March Fong Eu to thank for banning pay toilets -- and for the California Voter Foundation?

[It was] an offshoot of the secretary of state's office, to raise charitable funds for extra voter outreach. By 1993, it was [defunct], out of compliance with various tax filings. In college I'd worked for Gary K. Hart when he ran for Congress. It was grueling: high stakes, consultants, opposition research -- that stuff is really unpleasant. I wanted to be for all the voters, not just some of the voters. So this opportunity to restart the California Voter Foundation fell into my lap.

Even voter registration has become politicized. Someone on a right-wing website wrote that it is "profoundly … un-American'' to register welfare recipients to vote.

It's unfortunate. In a lot of the world you're automatically [registered] when you become 18 and you're a citizen. Here we have this extra hurdle.

Across the country, voting rights are not shared among all Americans. In California there's a variety of practices between the counties, an unevenness. That's a big problem.

You almost weren't allowed to vote in 2008.

They told me my polling place had moved. I got my sample ballot and went back and said, "This is my polling place." They were turning other people away.

Elections are run as if they're one-day sales. We run polling places for 12, 14 hours, staffed by people with very little training working very long hours on a job they only do once or twice a year. We should have people vote over several days in an environment staffed by well-trained people. I think about elections year-round; most people only think about them for maybe two months. It's hard to sustain the momentum to implement election reform.
continued at www.latimes.com

Videos from Pew's California voter registration conference now online

Last month, on July 14, the Pew Center on the States hosted a conference in Sacramento at the State Capitol to discuss ways to upgrade California's voter registration process.  I participated in one of the panel discussions; videos from the entire conference are now available via the California Channel's web site.  Here's a rundown:

Session 1:  Conference introduction by David Becker, Project Director, Pew Center on the States, with Gail Pellerin, President of the California Association of Clerks and Election Officials, and Bill McInturff, Partner and Co-Founder, Public Opinion Strategies presenting Pew research findings.

Session 2:  "The Role of Voter Registration in the Democratic Process", presented by Oregon Secretary of State Kate Brown.

Session 3:  "Our Current System - Costly and Inefficient", moderated by Catherine Hazelton, Sr. Program Officer with The James Irvine Foundation, and featuring: John Lindback, Former Director of Elections, Oregon/Alaska; Jill LaVine, Registrar of Voters, Sacramento County; and Kim Alexander, President & Founder, California Voter Foundation.

Session 4:  "Achieving the Dual Goals - Protecting the Right to Vote While Maintaining the Integrity of the System", moderated by Amy Dominguez-Arms, Program Director, The James Irvine Foundation and featuring: Kathay Feng, Executive Director, CA Common Cause; Dean Logan, Registrar of Voters, Los Angeles County; Heather Smith, President, Rock the Vote; Edward Hailes, Managing Director, Advancement Project; Rob Stutzman, President, Stutzman Public Affairs; and Antonio Gonzales, President, Southwest Voter Registration Education Project.

Session 5:  "The Potential for Technology to Improve the Way California Maintains and Updates its Voter Rolls", discussing Pew's plans for an Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), featuring: Jeff Butcher, Executive IT Architect, IBM; Pam Smith, President, Verified Voting; Shane Hamlin, Director of Elections, Washington state; Dave Macdonald, Registrar of Voters, Alameda County; and Jim Dempsey, Vice President for Public Policy, Center for Democracy and Technology.

Election bills up in the Legislature Tuesday, May 3

Both the Senate and Assembly's election committees will hold hearings on Tuesday, May 3 to take up a number of bills that would impact California elections.

The Senate Elections Committee is meeting at 1:30 in Room 3191 at the State Capitol; though no webcast is available, there is an audio stream of the hearing offered online.  Bills to be taken up by this committee tomorrow include SB 397/Yee, which would allow counties to implement online voter registration; SB 334/Desaulnier, which would require the Secretary of State to identify and publish in the ballot pamphlet the top five donors supporting or opposing propositions; SB 908/Runner would allow military overseas voters and their families to submit ballots via email; SB 202/Hancock would increase the initiative filing fee from $200 to $,2000; SB 448/DeSaulnier would require initiative petition circulators to wear a badge stating whether their were volunteers or paid; and SB 348/Correa, which make vote-by-mail ballots eligible to be counted as long as they are postmarked by election day and received within six days of the election (under current law, VBM ballots must be received by Election Day in order to be counted); and SB 641/Calderon would provide opportunities for Californians to register and vote after the 15 day voter registration deadline.

The Assembly Elections Committee is meeting at the same time, in room 444 at 1:30 at the State Capitol on Tuesday.  The Assembly's Daily File shows numerous bills will also be heard by this committee, and an audio feed is also available online.  One bill in particular that I am paying attention to is AB 1146/Norby, which would raise the threshold for itemizing campaign contributions and independent expenditures from the current level of $100 to $200, thus enabling more donors to remain anonymous.

SacBee - Online Voter Registration Long Overdue

The May 1, 2011 edition of the Sacramento Bee featured this editorial about the need to implement online voter registration in California.  Excerpts are featured below.

Think about 6.4 million people. That's more people than live in 34 of the 50 states. It's also the number of Californians who are eligible to vote but are not registered.
---
The Legislature approved online registration in 2008, to no avail. Clearly frustrated with delays and excuses, some lawmakers are plunging ahead with their own solutions.

Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco, is carrying legislation that would authorize counties to permit online registration.
----
A county-by-county system is not the preferred method of registering voters. However, it may be the only solution, given the uncertain status of a statewide online voter registration.

Back to that number, 6.4 million people eligible to vote but not registered. That's more than are registered in all but five of the 50 states. Individuals should take it upon themselves to register. But California should make it as easy as logging onto a laptop.