In These
Times
August 24, 2004
Hindering
America's Vote
By Steven Hill
The Help America Vote Act (HAVA), the electoral reform bill
passed by Congress in 2002, is a mixed blessing. In fact, HAVA never
addressed the most glaring problem of American election
administration—the decentralized election bureaucracy of more than
3,000 counties that run elections with few national standards, no
uniformity and little oversight.
HAVA does include some positive gains, but those have suffered
from foot dragging and stalled implementation. Here is a scorecard
of HAVA implementation:
- Electoral Assistance Commission: HAVA took a timid step
of establishing the most crucial component of good election
administration, and what most democracies already have—a
national elections commission. The Electoral Assistance
Commission (EAC) was given limited powers to “assist” states
and issue voluntary guidelines. The Democratic Party appointed
its commissioners right away, but Republicans didn’t appoint
theirs until January 2004. Four months before the November
election, the EAC barely functions with seven full-time staff
members and a recently appointed 15-member technical standards
committee.
- Funding for new equipment and training: Congress
allocated $4 billion to replace antiquated punch-card voting
equipment and to train poll workers. The catch was that the
money couldn’t be allocated until the EAC commissioners had
been appointed. Hence, by stalling the appointment of their
commissioners, the Republicans also stalled the allocation of
the money (surprise, surprise). On June 17, the EAC finally sent
$861 million to 25 states, but the allocation comes too close to
the November election. And training of poll workers remains
inadequate.
- Provisional ballots: States now must allow voters to
cast what is known as a “provisional ballot” if they are not
on the voter list in their precinct, and election officials must
validate or deny each provisional ballot after the election
before certifying winners. If used in Florida, voters banned by
the notorious felon blacklist could have cast a provisional
ballot. But implementation of the provisional ballot has been
plagued by the familiar pattern—lack of follow-through, lack
of funding, and most importantly, lack of national standards,
producing little uniformity from state to state. Some states
allow provisionals to be counted if they are filed in the wrong
precinct, but at least 16 states throw them out. And few states
have worked out details on how to train poll workers to
implement provisional balloting, setting up the potential for a
ballot-by-ballot fight in any close election.
- Statewide computerized voter lists: Despite the
critics, statewide voter databases are an important gain that
make universal voter registration possible as is practiced in
many European democracies where 18-year-olds automatically are
registered to vote. Were this to happen in the United States, 50
million voters would be instantly added to the rolls, many of
them young people and minorities. Yet no state has made any
progress with this HAVA mandate.
- Having first-time voters who register by mail provide
identification at the polls: Requiring these voters to show
proof of identity such as a driver’s license or electric bill
was the most dreaded part of HAVA. While it’s supposed to
apply only to first-time voters, that distinction already has
been confused or misused by poll workers during primary
elections this year, causing eligible voters to be turned away.
Given how poorly trained poll workers generally are, imagine the
confusion this November as some voters are required to provide
IDs and others are not.
Here’s one small example of how HAVA played out in a recent
election. In East Chicago, Indiana, Helen Hernandez was mistakenly
asked to produce identification in May’s primary, even though she
has lived there since the ’50s and has voted in just about every
election. Hernandez complained, but the poll worker rejected her
protests and did not offer her a provisional ballot, which HAVA
requires when there is a dispute. Hernandez was on a lunch break
from her janitor’s job and did not have time to retrieve her
identification.
Some of HAVA’s provisions could be major steps forward in
bringing U.S. election administration into the 21st Century, setting
a course that eventually might put us on par with Brazil and India
(both have national election commissions that establish national
standards and have been able to successfully implement touchscreen-computerized
voting without the conflict and controversy it has produced in the
United States). But sluggish implementation has made the gains of
HAVA largely ineffective. As a result, we are heading into another
presidential election with a Third World election administration
infrastructure. Can you say Florida Redux? |