POSITION PAPER ON ELECTION REFORM

ADOPTED APRIL 19, 2005

Our election process needs significant improvement. There were long lines at many polls. “[M]illions of Americans waited in line for three, four, even seven hours to cast votes.”1 At tiny Kenyon College in Gambier, Ohio, some students had to stand in line for eleven hours and the polls had to stay open until almost 4AM Wednesday to accommodate all those who wished to cast a ballot.2 Various tricks were used to reduce the number of minority voters, including (in Franklin County, Ohio) having fewer voting machines in many minority precincts than had been allocated to those precincts in 2000.3 Partisan election officials often issued rulings favoring their own party.4 Some individuals entitled to provisional ballots were told they had no right to them.5 Though 59% of the voting-age population did turn out to vote in the 2004 presidential contest, the highest figure since 1968, it follows that 41% did NOT do so. And in non-presidential elections, the turnout is usually much lower.

The Staten Island Democratic Association suggests that the United States Congress enact legislation mandating the following rules for federal elections in order to increase the accuracy of the vote count in these elections, to make voting there less of a chore, and to increase voter turnout there. (Federal elections are those for U.S. President/Vice President, U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives. Thanks to Article I, Sec. 4 of the U.S. Constitution, Congress may pass laws determining how these elections are to be conducted.6) It is to be hoped that the states would enact analogous reforms for elections involving no federal offices. (Some of the reforms we suggest would, of course, inevitably apply to state and local contests held on the same day as federal elections.)

1. Election Day in even numbered years, i.e., those when federal elections are held, should be a national holiday.

2. The polls on Election Day in such years should be open everywhere in the United States from 6AM to 9PM to accommodate those who have to work on holidays.

3. All ex-felons should be entitled to vote in federal elections. These men and women have paid their debts to society and should have a say in choosing those who enact legislation affecting their lives.

4. Those officials responsible for administering federal elections, e.g., deciding who can vote, what type of voting machines should be used, should be selected on a nonpartisan basis.7 In the alternative, to the extent multimember boards are entrusted with making such decisions, they must be composed of an equal number of Democrats and Republicans. In jurisdictions where other parties pull a significant percentage of the vote, they too should be represented on the boards administering federal elections.

5. Poll workers for federal elections should be thoroughly trained before every such election and “there should be standards for the number of voting machines and poll workers per 100 voters”.8 These reforms would reduce waiting time at the polls.

6. The officials responsible for administering federal elections should know how the machines under their jurisdiction operate and test these when they are first delivered and before each federal election.9

7. The requirement that people who want to vote have to register to vote in advance of election day is a significant factor in reducing voter voter turnout.10 Some have suggested same-day voter registration -i.e., allowing people to register as late as election day – as a device for improving turnout.11 The Staten Island Democratic Association is skeptical about this reform as it is as easy for a fraudster to forge her name twice on election day as it is for her to forge it just once. What we suggest for increasing voter registration is amending the law setting up the Help America Vote Foundation to direct that Foundation to finance vigorous state and local voter registration efforts. (The Help America Vote Foundation statute is 36 USC 152601ff.)

8. “Voting by mail” is another means suggested for reducing lines at the polls. However, we are skeptical about allowing people (other than those casting absentee ballots) to vote by mail several weeks before the election. What worries us most about this reform is that information very helpful to people deciding how to vote often comes to light a week or so prior to election day.

9. Though we do not wish to be rigidly dogmatic about which type of voting machine is best to employ, we agree with the League of Women Voters that there is much to be said for optical-scan voting systems. Under optical scanning, a machine similar to those used to read examinations scans a paper ballot. That original ballot is kept and can be made available should a recount be necessary. As the League of Women Voters asserts, “Precinct- based optical scanners meet [our] criteria of secure, accurate, recountable and accessible”.12

FOOTNOTES
1 Woolner, Ann – “Who Cares About Reforming U.S. Elections Now?”, Bloomberg.com, Bloomberg Columnists, Nov. 5, 2004.
2 Kenyon College Alumni Bulletin, Winter 2005, pp. 40ff.
3 Columbus Dispatch, Nov. 27, 2004, p. A11.
4 New York Times, Nov. 7, 2004, Sec. 4, p. 10.
5 Woolner, op. cit. n. 1.
6. Article I, Sec. 4 Clause 1 declares that “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such…. Regulations”
7. New York Times, Nov. 7, 2004, Sec. 4, p. 10.
8. Ibid.
9. Selkirk, Ted – “Fixing the Vote”, Scientific American, Oct. 2004, p.90, 97
10. Wang, Tova – “Reforming the Voter Registration System”, Federal Election Reform Network, www.tcf.org.
11. Ibid.
12. League President Marcia Merrins quoted in press release dated Mar. 9, 2005 on VerifiedVoting.org.