INTRODUCTION
Delegates to the 1999 LWVMD Convention adopted a study to develop League
positions that will further the League's "Making Democracy Work"
project by increasing voter participation. Low voter turnout is recognized
as a serious threat to our democracy: nationwide, 49.8% of the voting age
population voted in 1996; 1998 saw only 36.4% of that population going to
the polls. (Comparable figures for Maryland were 46.6% in 1996, and 39.4%
in 1998).
The Study Committee focused its research on Maryland's current policies
and practices covering vote registration and balloting, and how other states
and the District of Columbia administer elections. These Fact Sheets discuss
the results of our research, and address how lack of access to the voting
process can be alleviated.
The Committee plans an informational study in 2000-2001 of how methods,
such as proportional representation, may affect trust in government and voter
turnout.
VOTING SYSTEMS CONSIDERED
1. Same Day Registration/Voter Registration Deadline
The majority of states have a deadline to register to vote that is between
24 and 30 days prior to an election. An increasing number of states are shortening
that time. Maryland's current registration deadline is 25 days prior to an
election. Seven states allow registration at the polling place on election
day. The LWVUS supports same-day registration.
Statistically, the states with same-day registration have higher voter turnout
than those without; states with an early registration deadline have lower
voter turnout than those with a later deadline.
Proponents for short deadlines or election may registration argue that less
politically inclined citizens, especially young ones, frequently aren't inspired
to participate in the process until high visibility campaign debates or frenetic
last minute campaigning assaults them, and by then, it's too late to join
the process in most states.
Opponents of short deadlines or election day registration fear the possibility
of fraudulent registration which cannot be detected until after the votes
are tabulated. They also question the ability of local election authorities
to provide adequate officials/judges on election day to process applications.
Consideration could be given to phasing in a lowered registration deadline,
for example, 15 days in 4 years, 10 days in 8 years, election day registration
in 12 years.
2. Provisional Ballots
Provisional ballots are a means of meeting the "fail-safe" provisions
of the National Voter Registration Act. Its purpose is, on the one
hand, to ensure that voters are not deprived of their right to vote,
and on the other hand, to guard against voter fraud. Provisional
balloting would be activated if the voter's name does not appear on the
list of eligible voters when she appears at the polling place to vote.
The cause might be change of address not reported to the election
board, deletion of the voter's name through error, computer error, or a
claim that the voter has already voted (or received an absentee
ballot). The voter will be allowed to vote, using special procedures.
Her vote will be isolated until her registration can be validated by
searching election board records. The preferred method of isolation is
to seal the ballot in an envelope and set it aside until her
registration status can be determined. In the case of a voter who has
moved or who has otherwise appeared at a polling place where she is not
registered, she may be required to cast that provisional that
provisional ballot at either her former poll or her new poll. In some
instances, she may be allowed to vote unprovisionally even though she
is no longer a resident of that district. This would be on a one time
basis. If she is required to vote provisionally, when and if the
validity of the registration is verified, the ballot is mingled with
the general body of ballots. If not, it will be excluded from the vote
count. In most cases, however, an appeal process is provided. When this
is completed, again the ballot will either be counted or not. Another
advantage of provisional balloting is that disputes at the polling
place are avoided. At this point, 11 states allow provisional voting.
Objections to provisional voting are the extra expense and the additional
time to determine the actual outcome of the election. The election process
is lengthened by the time it takes to review election board records to determine
the provisional voter's registration status. Some candidates may object to
a prolonged period of suspense.
Proponents of provisional voting argue that computerization of registration
records will allow searches to occur quickly and that voter participation
will be increased because voters who are unsure of their registration status,
who might ordinarily stay away from the polls to avoid embarrassing problems
at the polling place, will vote provisionally.
3. All-Mail Voting
Some 16 states, mostly in the West, use some kind of all-mail ballot elections,
in which all registered voters receive official ballots by mail and return
completed ballots by mail to their local election authority, eliminating voting
at polling places. All-mail voting has most frequently been used for special
elections or elections not involving candidates. Besides the cost-saving of
not having to hire thousands of polling place workers, officials in these
states have found that voters like the convenience of having the ballot two
to three weeks before the election. Ballots are sent to registered voters
by non-forwardable mail so that voters who are no longer eligible to vote
in that jurisdiction by virtue of a change of address do not get them. All-mail
balloting has changed the way campaigns are run; candidates must organize
earlier, do more mailing and spend less on others methods of campaigning.
This method of voting has increased voter turnout significantly where it has
been used.
4. Early Voting
Texas and some other states allow registered voters to cast ballots in person
at the local election board and at designated satellite locations for two
to three weeks before election day. Election officials staff voting sites
at shopping malls, schools, churches, grocery stores, or community centers.
They have the records of registered voters so they can determine eligibility
and they can notify the central office that a voter has voted, to prevent
the voter from voting at another location. They employ procedures to protect
the security of all ballots and other materials. This is convenient for the
voter and Texas officials have found that in some areas, as many as 50% of
the voters take advantage of early voting. It seems to increase voter participation;
in some precincts as many as 70% to 80% of registered voters voted.
5. Permanent Absentee List
Where permanent absentee lists are used, registered voters are allowed to
stay on a list of approved absentee voters and receive an application/ballot
without re-applying.
Four states (Oregon, Washington, Utah (some jurisdictions), New Jersey)
maintain unrestricted permanent absentee lists. Six states (Kansas, Missouri,
New York, Rhode Island, Tennessee and California) have permanent absentee
lists, but inclusion on this list is restricted, usually to physical disability.
Permanent absentee lists are convenient for registered voters. A voter should
not have to re-apply for an absentee ballot if the condition by which she
qualifies remains the same. Permanent absentee lists save time and money for
the election board, because absentee ballots or applications are automatically
generated by non-forwardable mail to registered voters on the list, without
the need to respond to individual requests. Voter participation would increase
because repeated applications for absentee ballots can be a barrier.
However, permanent absentee lists also discourage personal participation
at the polls. (In Oregon, the permanent absentee list evolved into all-mail
voting) There would also be potential increased mailing costs to election
boards if applications are mailed to all on the list instead of just to those
who remember to apply.
The Study Committee felt strongly that if such a permanent absentee list
were to be adopted, applications should be automatically generated, not a
ballot. This would prevent the issuance of ballots to deceased or relocated
voters.
6. Internet Voting
Serious study has begun on the issue of using the Internet to vote in official
elections. Pilot projects in recent presidential primaries resulted in increased
turnout by those who might not otherwise vote, and no serious problems arose.
The Secretary of State of California appointed a highly knowledgeable task
force to thoroughly study the issue of Internet voting, and its recommendations
have been reported. The task force recommended implementing this process in
a staged and graduated manner, with Internet voting first done at the polling
place under the watchful eye of regular election officials, and graduating
to voting at secure sites with the supervision of election officials, then
voting at secure sites without supervision, and finally, voting by Internet
from home or office.
Opponents to Internet voting are concerned with the security of the balloting
process, and election officials point out that they are not presently capable
of offering this method because of the lack of digitized voter information,
including signatures. The California task force recognizes these serious security
issues, and also remarks about the possibility of voter intimidation by employers
and others. Others fear that the "digital divide" will result in some
segments of the population being left out of the voting process if voting
by computer is their only option.
Proponents of Internet voting believe that it may be an effective method
of involving younger citizens in the election process. They point out that
millions of dollars could be saved by eliminating election day personnel and
polling place voting equipment. They also assume that it will certainly be
possible to vote by Internet at some point in the future, and that progressive
states will experiment with Internet voting in controlled ways before adopting
it as the single voting process.
7. Voters' Pamphlet
According to our survey, 19 states offer some type of voters' pamphlet or
material to voters before an election. In the vast majority of these states,
the publication contains no candidate information, but is only published when
there is a ballot question.
These are expensive, and Maryland has not had money to provide this service
by mail to voters in the past. However, beginning in 2000, ballot questions
will be place on the State Election Board's Web site, and can be reviewed
there, or printed out for further distribution and study. The official wording
of the questions will be included, with no explanation or narrative explanation.
This option of information retrieval, of course, is limited to those with
computer access.
What most voters are looking for, however, is candidate information. Candidate
information in a voter's pamphlet could be provided by each candidate, or
by a neutral third party (such as the League of Women Voters).
LWVMD has lobbied in the past for a simplified-language, non-partisan and
neutral, state-issued and state-funded voter's pamphlet. This consensus offers
the opportunity for LWVMD to reaffirm that position, if we choose to do so.
June, 2000
Consensus Questions
LWVMD Voter Participation Study, 1999-2000
Generally accepted criteria to evaluate an election system are:
_ Provides ballot security
_
Produces an accurate ballot count
_
Is convenient for voters
_
Efficiently and cost-effectively uses election resources
_
Is non-discriminatory
_
Promotes educating voters
_
Is accessible to disabled voters and safe for all voters
Using the above identified criteria, evaluate the following potential changes
to our present voting processes or procedures with the goal of increasing
voter participation. This evaluation will necessarily require a balancing
of the accepted criteria. For instance, all mail voting is cost effective,
but does it provide ballot security? Or, week-end and early voting is convenient
for voters, but is it cost-effective? Or, Internet voting is convenient, but
does it discriminate against those who do not have access to or knowledge
of computers?
WHICH CHANGES WOULD YOU SUPPORT AND WHY?
1. SAME DAY REGISTRATION - allow voters to register at the polling place
on election day. LWVUS has supported same day registration; should LWVMD pursue
the required change in law for Maryland?
2. SHORTEN THE DEADLINE TO REGISTER TO VOTE BEFORE AN ELECTION. If so, what
should the deadline be?
3. PROVISIONAL BALLOTS - allowing a voter whose name is not listed on the
polling place election register to vote a ballot which is segregated from
regularly cast ballots until the election authority can confirm the eligibility
of the voter.
4. ALL MAIL VOTING - procedures whereby all voters receive official ballots
by mail and return completed ballots by mail to their local election authority,
eliminating voting at
polling places on election day.
5. EARLY VOTING - allowing voters to cast ballots in person at the local
election board or at designated satellite locations for some period prior
to the election. If so, would you support early voting at the election board
only, at satellite locations, or both?
6. PERMANENT ABSENTEE VOTING - the local election authority maintains a
list of absentee voters who have qualified for absentee voter status, either
by voter affirmation of necessity or certification of a medical condition.
Those voters are automatically sent an application for an absentee ballot
prior to each election.
7. INTERNET VOTING - voting on a computer via the Internet. Would you support
study, research and pilot projects to determine the feasibility of Internet
voting in Maryland?
8. VOTER'S INFORMATION PAMPHLET - an informative, non-partisan, and opinion-neutral
education publication produced and distributed at government expense prior
to each election. If so, should the pamphlet contain information about candidates
or only ballot questions or referenda issues?
9. OTHER - Do you have other ideas to suggest?
League of Women Voters of Maryland
Back to top of page