Regardless of whether or not you agree with Danny Tarkanian’s politics,
he undoubtedly got one thing right when he announced his candidacy for
Secretary of State last week. "Nevada is going to a battleground state
again in 2008," Tarkanian said. "It is going to be very contentious
election and the person who oversees the election process, ensures the
fairness of it is the secretary of state.”
Although close elections in Ohio in 2004 and Florida in 2000 brought
some (negative) attention to these particular Secretaries of State,
most Americans still do not realize the influence (both positive and
negative) a Secretary of State with the duty of chief election official
has over their elections. While specific duties vary by state, this
office is often responsible for administering areas such as providing
voter information, campaign finance disclosures, voting equipment
purchases, training local election officials and ordering recounts. In
this administrative role, this office also has important influence with
state legislatures when they take up measures such as registration
deadlines and voter identification requirements.
Beyond mandates to administer elections in a fair manner, many
Secretaries of State around the country also play a leading role in
encouraging participation in their states’ elections. This can include
activities such as exploring more effective methods of voter education,
working with schools to engage young people in the political process or
developing and supporting community voter registration efforts.
Although Tarkanian may be correct when he says "it isn't our
responsibility to push people to the polls,” it is easily within the
influence of the office he seeks to hold.
As we begin the 2006 election cycle, voters should give the same
attention to Secretary of State races as they do to more high profile
Congressional and Gubernatorial contests. After all, the Secretary of
State administers the system we use to elect these other offices. When
voters consider the candidates for this office, they should of course
weigh these candidates’ abilities to administer elections in a fair
manner that balances problems of voter accessibility and voter fraud.
But more than that, they should consider the candidates’ electoral
philosophy. While a chief election official may not be required to make
our elections more accessible and inclusive, does it not strengthen our
democracy to have someone who at least attempts to do so?