OhioNews Bureau
ONB COLUMBUS: With absentee voting set to begin in New Hampshire in about a month, it seemed the right time for the Election Law @ Moritz (EL@M) group at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law to release its year-long comprehensive study of the election administration systems in five key Midwestern states.
The question the study asked was how well election systems are working in five key Midwestern states including Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Ohio and can they withstand the pressures election forecasters say will come in 2008 when voter turnout is expected to be as high if not higher than it was in 2004, the last presidential election
Of the five states in the study, Ohio was determined to have the most lingering administrative problems from 2004. Such a finding is not likely to bring a smile to the face of Ohio’s new Democratic Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, who rode into office last year on the same horse that carried other Democratic candidates like Ted Strickland (Gov.), Marc Dann (Attorney General) and Richard Cordray (Treasurer) to their offices.
In the media release on the study posted at Dayton OS, Steven Huefner, a senior fellow at EL@M, said that despite the progress Ohio has made since 2004, "structural problems remain in how the state administers its elections."
"Having a partisan, elected secretary of state as the head election official, regardless of that person’s good intentions or knowledge of election administration, is not ideal," Huefner said, adding, "At times this structure has led to inconsistencies and suspicion across the state."
The trailer for the study titled "From Registration to Recounts" said it will provide "both some encouraging signs and some persistent reasons for concern."
KEY STUDY CONCLUSIONS
The study showed that state voter registration databases, a federal requirement by law, had not yet met Congressional goals. Ohioans, possibly as a result of the state’s deficiency in this regard, were found to have voted by provisional ballots at a rate more than three times greater than the other study states.
Contributing to polling place problems were poll worker training and recruiting problems, which had an impact on long lines, polls opening late and provisional ballots being issued inconsistently across the state.
Although Brunner inherited about 20 lawsuits from her predecessor, the controversial Republican Ken Blackwell, who has been accused by some election conspirators of helping to throw Ohio to Bush in 2004, her inability to resolve them in her 11 months on the job may contributing to "more uncertainty among local election officials."
The study, reflective of the spirit and thinking behind the four constitutional amendments proposed in 2005 by Reform Ohio Now that would have radically changed the election landscape in the state, recommended that special tribunals be established to handle election disputes, freeing the state judiciary from responsibility over these issues.
The study was quick to point out that the each of the five states "has a unique election system, and collectively they represent the variety of systems used across the nation."
What really stood out is that states with strong, nonpartisan oversight had significantly fewer problems," said Dan Tokaji, associate director of Election Law @ Moritz. "The registration process still functions as a barrier to participation in some states. On the other hand, Minnesota and Wisconsin have great Election Day Registration systems that increase turnout while reducing the need for provisional ballots." [Dan Tokaji, EL@M associate director]
OHIO FINDINGS
- The Ohio Secretary of State, the state’s chief election official, is an elected partisan official who plays a very prominent role in the state’s election administration system. The partisan cast of this position not only has often generated suspicion and mistrust, but also has at times detracted from the secretary’s ability to provide strong, consistent guidance to local officials.
- The state’s voter registration database, which is required by the Help America Vote Act of 2002, does not yet meet the goals set by Congress. This has contributed to more than three times the typical number of provisional ballots being cast.
- There is significant variation in the administration of elections across counties in the state, including in the use and counting of provisional ballots, the training of poll workers and election technology. These problems have led to voting lines as long as 10 hours and heavy reliance on provisional ballots.
- There have been significant problems in Cuyahoga County, the most populous county in the state and home of Cleveland, related to poll worker mistakes and misconduct. In a May 2006 primary election, approximately 20 percent of voting places opened late, voting machines malfunctioned, verified paper trails were missing, and security seals were broken. Even more troubling, memory cards from the electronic voting equipment in one polling place went missing. In addition, 15,000 absentee ballots had to be hand counted, resulting in a five-day delay of results. Similar problems plagued the county in November 2006, and in early 2007 two county election officials were sentenced to prison for violating election laws.
- Litigation from previous elections remains ongoing, with more than 20 suits pending against the state. These lawsuits cover a myriad of election administration issues from voter registration to provisional ballots and voting equipment allocation.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OHIO
- Develop bipartisan leadership over election administration. A statewide bipartisan election administration committee made up of county election officials would help create buy-in and consistency across the state.
- Place responsibility for state election administration with a nonpartisan statewide officer. While 31 other states also charge their secretary of state with being the head election official, this assignment has been particularly troubling in Ohio, where at times the secretary was actively campaigning while at the same time administering and interpreting election statutes. As reflected by the range and number of lawsuits concerning election administration in the state, a general feeling of distrust has arisen concerning the office’s ability to administer elections.
- Create nonpartisan tribunals to resolve election disputes. The state’s regular judiciary lacks the independence and structure to handle election issues in most neutral and expeditious manner.
IMPORTANT STUDY OBSERVATIONS
Minnesota and Wisconsin both have Election Day Registration, a practice the researchers said leads to increased voter turnout and reduces reliance on provisional ballots, which have proved problematic in Ohio, as was demonstrated in 2004. In stark contrast to the false specter of voter fraud espoused repeatedly by Republicans, the study found no evidence that Election Day Registration increased fraud.
Look for the rising issue of illegal and undocumented immigrants, which Republicans will again say is rampant and should be guarded against by voter ID laws like Indiana’s, which the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear and is expected to render a decision on next summer, just in time to affect next year’s November elections.
Study researchers noted that an alternative to Election Day Registration is an "affidavit ballot," which they describe as process that allows a voter to first sign an affidavit affirming that they attempted to register and then allows them to complete a new registration application and cast a ballot that is marked with an identifying number, which is then counted with the regular ballots. This ballot, they say, is presumptively valid unless a post-election challenge is successfully brought in court to contest its validity.
A variation on this theme is the system of ""provisional Election Day Registration," in which any voter who is not registered on Election Day would be allowed to cast a provisional ballot after completing a registration application. The provisional ballot would be counted once the voter's registration application is reviewed and approved post-election. "Provisional EDR" would entail the disadvantages of HAVA-mandated provisional voting, which include inconsistent administration among localities and inevitable delays in certifying election results, but would embrace one important benefit of EDR as currently practiced in those states that have it: eligible citizens who make an effort to participate in democracy by going to the polls on Election Day would not be precluded from casting a valid ballot because they missed a previous registration deadline.
Yet another innovative approach used in DuPage County, Illinois, to determine which voters must cast a provisional ballot that caught researcher’s eyes is the a kind of electronic flow chart that guides the poll workers at each step, constraining the poll worker’s choices and prompting them to ask the appropriate questions, dramatically reducing the chances of error in processing voters.
Among the serious problems they identified were the following:
- Poll workers who were unaware of or unable to enforce regulations.
- Partisan chief election officers issuing inconsistent or illogical rulings.
- Arcane policies that prevented some voters from registering.
- Inconsistencies in administering rules that resulted in voters receiving unequal treatment and risks of significant election litigation that would challenge the ability of state courts to reach outcomes perceived as nonpartisan or neutral.
These persistent problems, they said, lead them to make several suggestions for legislative leaders, as well as state and local election officials that may be difficult to implement in time to make a difference in the 2008 election.
Others like these, they said, could have an immediate impact:
- State election officials should do all they can between now and November 2008 to promote consistency among local administrators and poll workers.
- Most states need to develop greater bipartisanship in matters of state-level election administration, something that the political parties could improve today if they found the will.
- A major concern is that elected state courts lack the neutrality and independence important for the successful resolution of a close election contest connected with some election system failure.
States should be exploring alternative mechanisms and tribunals for resolving such contests. [The Michigan Supreme Court's 4-3 partisan split last week in upholding the state's January 15 presidential primary – which mirrors the same court's split last summer upholding the state's voter identification statute – is emblematic of the difficulties of asking state courts to be the final arbiters of matters of election administration.]
50 MORE WAYS TO IMPROVE VOTING IN OHIO
For readers whose appetite has been whetted by the EL@M study and have more time to immerse themselves even deeper into the labyrinth of voting ideas, here's a link to an article that has 50 more ways that Ohio can do itself and its citizens a huge favor by retooling its fundamentally flawed system of elections.
John Michael Spinelli is a former Ohio Statehouse government and political reporter and business columnist. He now serves as the OhioNews Bureau Chief for ePluribus Media Journal.
If Kos readers have a news tip or story idea about Ohio politics or government, contact the OhioNews Bureau at: ohionews@www.epluribusmedia.org