Election Administration | Election Administration

• Brenda Wright - Director
• Scott Novakowski - Senior Policy Analyst
• Allegra Chapman - Counsel
• Tova Andrea Wang - Senior Democracy Fellow

• Miles Rapoport - President

Congress should address the need for both national standards and a more robust enforcing authority. If not, more decision making will fall to the states. With the passage of the Help America Vote Act in 2002, too much was left up to individual state election officials and legislatures to decide, whether the machinery to use; how to implement the mandated computerization of registration lists; how to deal with list purges; how to implement voting-rights restoration laws, provisional ballot counting, and identification requirements for new and existing voters; and many other things besides. But our states lack the resources to ensure the integrity and equality of our electoral system. For instance, it is simply not possible for each state to assure itself that the electronic equipment it is purchasing is impervious to failure or tampering. The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) needs to play a larger role in setting standards and evaluating the machinery and its testing process.

But, while more national authority is needed administratively, at the broader policy level, states have indeed been laboratories for democracy. Maine, for instance, has led the way in enacting election-day registration, public financing of campaigns, allowing voting rights even for people in prison, and proportional allocation of presidential electors. Nevada has been a leader in acquiring electronic voting machines with paper trails and has accomplished better voter registration in socialservice agencies than most other states. Other states have been better known for their failures and controversies than for their successes, and will be under major pressure for change.

Reformers need to join with secretaries of state and legislators who care about making democracy work to develop and enact a real agenda of reforms. One element is the necessary administrative repairs, like computerized voter lists, adequate poll-worker compensation and training, reliable and auditable voting machines, and provisional ballot standards. But in addition, we need bold thinking and action to genuinely open up the democratic process so that everyone has the fullest opportunity to join in. Election-day registration, early voting, and generally wider opportunities to cast ballots should head the list, as well as liberalizing voting-rights restoration, encouraging youth participation, and changing procedures to expand voters' choices and voices.

There is reason for optimism about the prospects for reform. These issues moved from the margins to the center of the debate after the 2000 election and the myriad problems witnessed in elections since. Not only traditional reformers but thousands of newly energized activists and a sensitized media experienced the frailty of the system firsthand, and they want to work for change. Elected officials at the state level, whatever their party, know that shoddy election administration casts doubt on the competence and legitimacy of the political system itself. In addition, after this year's results, it is not axiomatic that one party or the other benefits from higher or lower turnout.

All this should create an opportunity for bipartisan support for reform that both opens up the process and administers it competently. And progressives, who care passionately about the issues decided by our democracy, need the patience and the determination to protect and broaden our democracy and make it work on behalf of all.

Research

Analysis & Opinion

Advocacy

In the News

Events

[ 220 Fifth Ave., 5th Flr. New York, NY 10001 | 212.633.1405 | info@demos.org ]
Home | About | Contact | Newsroom | Privacy Policy | Reprint Permission