The Failures of ‘Fail-Safe’ Voting
Friday, November 30th, 2007Scott Novakowski, a senior policy analyst for Demos, submitted this post as a guest blogger for The Hill.
Americans are by now well aware of the widespread problems that shook our election system in 2000 and in 2004. Congressional leaders have introduced legislation to address these issues, and research studies and news investigations have looked into some of the most egregious problems that disenfranchised eligible citizens. But as news reports in this off-year election, newly illuminated problems from 2006, and recent congressional hearings have shown, there’s still a lot of work to be done to ensure the integrity of the election process, particularly in the often-overlooked area of provisional balloting.
According to a recent news report, voters in Utah were illegally denied provisional ballots in the Ogden, Utah, mayoral race. The American Civil Liberties Union of Utah has received complaints from voters who were denied provisional ballots and turned away from the polls after their names ended up on a challenge list circulated by the campaign of incumbent Mayor Matthew Godfrey. For his part, Godfrey also claims that some of his supporters were turned away from the polls without being offered a provisional ballot. The ACLU has launched an investigation into the irregularities.
Media reports in Virginia, leading up to that state’s recent General Assembly elections, suggested that problems with the state’s new computerized voter registration system could have driven many voters to cast provisional ballots. Fortunately, and largely through happenstance, those problems were averted. But not before several counties publicly questioned the accuracy of their election information and a registrar from Charlottesville went so far as to warn the county’s elected officials to expect problems on Election Day. If the predicted meltdown had occurred, provisional ballots would have been the only safety-net available to these voters. Read the rest of this entry »

