|
|
|
|
| Safeguarding Elections
Appleseed, through its pro bono counsel, Latham & Watkins, identified a number of problems that arose in connection with the 2004 elections. From erroneous purges and problems with absentee ballots in Florida, to long lines and poll closings in New Mexico, to contested provisional balloting in Ohio, Election Day 2004 was far from perfect. The Election Protection Commission has identified the following five problems as receiving the most reported complaints in the wake of the 2004 election: registration processing, absentee ballots, machine errors, voter suppression or intimidation, and provisional ballots. In fact, the Election Protection Commission received more than 10,000 reports of voter registration problems alone.
|
|
 |
| |
|
|
| Although these problems stem from a variety of often unrelated sources, our research revealed that there are a number of related problems that arise out of the lack of uniform, reliable, secure, and accessible voter registration databases. Specifically, statewide registration databases will help to minimize reliance on provisional ballots, reduce the incidence of erroneous purging, and alleviate the long lines and other access problems experienced by voters on Election Day. |
| |
| The Help America Vote Act (“HAVA”) requires all states to implement statewide voter registration databases prior to the first federal election of 2006 and provides a vehicle to implement changes to address the problems Appleseed has identified. At a recent retrospective conference on the 2004 election, Rep. Steny Hoyer cited HAVA’s statewide registration database as the most important and far-reaching reform included in the bill. Although there are a number of public interest organizations focusing on a variety of problems arising out of the recent elections, and differing means to address them, no group appears to be putting a substantial effort into making sure that states, in implementing the HAVA mandate, proceed in the right direction to address the problems we have identified. Our goal is to compile a booklet of potential difficulties and recommendations associated with statewide database implementation for use by local Appleseed Centers, and other advocacy organizations, in states around the country. These recommendations will be used to facilitate and enhance the dialogue on these important issues among government officials, legislators, researchers and the general public. Additionally, we are also evaluating whether amending the text of HAVA may be a more effective and comprehensive way to ensure the successful implementation of statewide registration databases. In our recommendations booklet, we will look to identify problems and suggest solutions in the following areas: |
| |
1) Implementation, Maintenance and Purging Standards
2) Security, Privacy, and Access Concerns
3) Statewide Databases and Provisional Voting |
| |
| Many diverse groups worked towards election reform before the 2004 election. We believe, however, that some very significant issues remain. We have researched several of the groups currently involved in election reform advocacy (e.g., Brennan Center for Justice, DEMOS, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and People for the American Way). Many of these groups have expressed an interest in HAVA’s statewide registration database requirement. Yet while many of these groups are interested in this area, to date, none have specifically and substantially addressed the issue. Therefore, we believe our project will make a unique contribution to the national election reform discussion. Further, we hope that completing and distributing a booklet on HAVA’s statewide registration database requirement will spark dialogue among state election officials, legislators, the media, and other nonprofits and advocates on how to best implement state databases, as well as whether HAVA should be amended to ensure successful implementation. |
Link to Appleseed report on safeguarding elections: