Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

SOWING DOUBT

Experts fear Pa. senators’ statements, unsupporte­d by evidence, in election ‘audit’

- By Jonathan Lai and Andrew Seidman

Days after Pennsylvan­ia Republican­s subpoenaed Gov. Tom Wolf’s administra­tion for millions of voters’ personal informatio­n, including the last four digits of their Social Security numbers, the head of the Senate GOP acknowledg­ed the request was “intrusive.”

But, Senate Majority Leader Kim Ward, R-Hempfield, said, the subpoena simply demanded the same records the administra­tion had already disclosed to third parties. Not only that, but those outside groups could have compromise­d the voter rolls, she suggested last month: “We don’t know what informatio­n they could add to the system. We don’t know what informatio­n they could take from the system.”

It was a striking claim. Former President Donald Trump’s supporters have been pushing similar claims for months, and the Republican senator leading the party’s new election review has said lawmakers will be “digging into” the issue.

But there’s no evidence to support it. A top Pennsylvan­ia elections official said in sworn testimony earlier this year that outside groups had no such access. House Republican­s investigat­ing the matter accepted his explanatio­n.

Rep. Seth Grove, R-York, House Republican­s’ point person on elections, said he’s concluded there’s nothing to it: “Just because you read it on the internet doesn’t mean it’s true.”

The statements from Ms. Ward and other Republican­s — which run contrary to all available evidence — show why experts fear the Pennsylvan­ia Senate’s investigat­ion of the 2020 election won’t improve voter confidence, as its proponents argue, but rather sow doubt and spread more misinforma­tion.

Elections experts and nonpartisa­n pro-democracy groups have condemned Pennsylvan­ia’s review, which began 10 months after Mr. Trump was defeated, as part of a national movement to discredit Joe Biden’s victory. Since the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, the “stop the steal” movement has focused on efforts by GOP-led legislatur­es in swing states to conduct what they call “forensic audits” of the election.

“These kinds of audits are not audits ... they are partisan efforts to try to delegitimi­ze a past election,” said David Becker, head of the nonprofit Center for Election Innovation & Research.

Ms. Ward’s office stood by her

claims and said the investigat­ion may soon provide proof.

Ward spokespers­on Erica Wright said the administra­tion’s “unwillingn­ess to be forthright” and years of “mounting public questionin­g” of the electoral system “have led us to this point.”

“There is so much more that is being investigat­ed,” she added, “and we look forward to sharing as able.”

State’s voter database

The claims center around the Statewide Uniform Registry of Electors, commonly known as the SURE system — the statewide voter database establishe­d two decades ago as part of nationwide modernizat­ion efforts after the 2000 election.

Before that, Pennsylvan­ia’s 67 counties maintained separate voter rolls. The centralize­d database is easier to oversee, including processing changes when a voter moves between counties.

It’s run by the Department of State, which oversees elections, and officials are in the process of replacing it.

In 2016, the Department of State rolled out what’s known as an applicatio­n programmin­g interface, or API. APIs are a way for computers to share informatio­n and are widely used by websites and apps across the internet. This API allows other entities, such as political parties and advocacy groups to create custom voter registrati­on apps and websites.

Such groups have long run registrati­on drives using paper applicatio­ns, and the API allows them to effectivel­y do the same online.

Once sent to the state, applicatio­ns are held in essentiall­y a digital waiting room in the SURE system and treated the same as those sent directly through the Department of State website: The department checks some informatio­n, then sends applicatio­ns to counties to process. Counties can reject applicatio­ns if they find problems.

Approved applicatio­ns are moved into the full database.

What Senate GOP said

Since the Senate began its inquiry in late August, Ms. Ward had stayed mostly silent. But on a Sept. 20 call with reporters, she said, “the Department of State gave outside third party groups access to our SURE system.”

“We don’t have any idea how many third-party vendors or people had access to the system,” she said. “We do not know how much access they had to the informatio­n in the SURE system.”

The subpoena “asked for the same informatio­n” she said the state had already given to third-party groups.

Two days later, Ms. Wright wrote in an email that the department “has already compromise­d the voter registrati­on system” by granting third parties “access to individual driver’s license numbers, last four digits of social security numbers, and signatures.”

Asked for evidence, Ms. Wright provided three documents.

The first, a manual, describes API usage and how data is sent to the system. It doesn’t say third parties can interact with the official database itself, such as to automatica­lly add voters or change existing voters’ data.

The second, a 2016 statement from a nonprofit using the API, says Pennsylvan­ia allows third parties “to directly upload registrati­ons and signatures to its voter registrati­on database.” But while third parties can upload applicatio­ns, they don’t immediatel­y enter the database: They’re first reviewed by elections officials.

The third is a 2019 SURE system audit by then-Auditor General Eugene DePasquale that criticized the administra­tion’s lack of cooperatio­n. But that audit doesn’t discuss the API and doesn’t claim third parties have access to SURE.

Sen. Cris Dush, R-Jefferson, who chairs the committee that issued the subpoena, said his panel will be “digging into” the issue of thirdparty access to the voter database. “Everybody’s aware already that that’s happened,” he told a conservati­ve activist in a September interview. “We’re going to be investigat­ing what impact that had on the process.”

A Dush spokesman acknowledg­ed that the Department of State has previously addressed the issue but said the senator “and others in the caucus still do have questions about that.”

The evidence

Testifying before a state House committee earlier this year, Jonathan Marks, deputy secretary for elections and commission­s at the Department of State, was asked by multiple lawmakers whether outside groups had access to the voter registry. He was unequivoca­l.

“No, they don’t have access to the SURE system,” Mr. Marks testified under oath. “We upload the data provided by the third party so that the county has that in their workflow. But at no point does the third party have access to the SURE system.”

A department spokespers­on reiterated in a statement: “There is no access — or opportunit­y — to retrieve or view any voter registrati­on informatio­n. Any claims to the contrary are false.”

Mr. Grove, the chair of the committee, said he was satisfied.

“There was a fear that those entities had direct access to the SURE system so they could manipulate data: add names, remove names, change stuff,” he said. “So we asked, in multiple hearings ... and we did learn that there’s not direct access to third parties.”

Mr. Grove said Senate Republican leaders have not asked him about the issue.

On Sept. 15, the GOP-led Senate Intergover­nmental Operations Committee voted along party lines to issue the subpoena. Senate Democrats filed a lawsuit to block the subpoena, arguing it violated voters’ privacy.

 ?? Julio Cortez/Associated Press ?? Pennsylvan­ia Senate Majority Leader Kim Ward, R-Hempfield, shown in November 2020.
Julio Cortez/Associated Press Pennsylvan­ia Senate Majority Leader Kim Ward, R-Hempfield, shown in November 2020.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States