Voting Rights

WomenMatter will continuously post updates on all this and other issues as we monitor the continuing philosophical and practical debates nationwide. Please check back often for updates. Past updates are available for reference on the Voting Rights Archives page.

Class Without a Teacher: States Struggle to Reform Voting Without EAC

When President Bush signed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) into law in 2002, he gave states a big homework assignment: Each state must reform its election system to comply with the new federal mandates.

HAVA encourages states to update voting machines, train poll workers, establish strict voting guidelines, and create voter databases. Since most of the responsibility of election reform falls on the states, HAVA created a federal tutor of sorts –the Election Administration Commission (EAC). The EAC is supposed to act as a guide and a reference for states; it also disburses the necessary funds.

Oh EAC, where are you?

Although most states began their reform projects last year, the federal government still hasn’t created the EAC. Currently, The Federal Election Commission’s Office of Election Administration has been called in to temp. Since their funding runs out at the end of September 2003, it is unclear if they will continue to act as a substitute, if the EAC will finally be instated, or if states will be left with nothing.

Although HAVA is a federal voting reform bill, states have very few instructions and very little guidance for how to go about the whole thing. It’s as if a teacher assigned a big project and a due date, and then left the room. The students are left with no leadership and very few supplies. Indeed, most states have spent their own money on reforms and are expecting reimbursement.

States prefer to be loners

Traditionally, states have created and maintained their own election systems, and that’s just fine with them. States typically resent any kind of federal nose-sticking in their election processes. So, voting systems vary from state to state; our voting is decentralized.

Before the 2000 presidential election, California had one voting setup and Florida had another. The rules and equipment and procedures varied from state to state and sometimes from county to county.

After the 2000 presidential election fiasco, and even after HAVA is fully implemented, states will still have different systems and different voting machines (some are even keeping the punch card and lever machines, and will therefore have to do extra voter education). HAVA does not create a centralized, federally regulated and operated voting system.

Decentralized voting, the pros and cons Cons

Clearly, an incoherent voting system has its problems. For example, there is no federal regulation of voting machines. Some feel that the new Direct Recording Electronic machines, commonly known as touch-screen machines, have not been thoroughly studied and may actually cause more problems than they solve. (For more on touch-screen machines, click here.)

Although individual states like California have conducted their own research and tests on touch-screens, some people believe that the federal government needs to step in, study, and standardize voting machines, so that all votes are collected and counted in the same fair and accurate way.

Another problem is the way in which states are coming up with reforms. Although HAVA sets guidelines, they are vague and leave plenty of room for interpretation. Critics claim that New York’s reform planning has been very closed. They say that since it is directed by white, Republican men, and therefore leaving out representatives from New York City’s diverse population.

New York also turned in a vague description of their plans for election reform. HAVA required states to submit an outline of their methods. Some states, like Arizona, turned in detailed descriptions of their plan of action. Others, like New York and Utah, gave hazy accounts of their strategy. If we continue with the classroom analogy, the teacher gave imprecise directions for the outline, instead of letting the students know exactly what was required. The result was predictable: some students went all out and others did the bare minimum. The upshot is that clear-cut expectations and more federal involvement may improve the reform process.

Pros

As we know, Arizona is drastically different from New York. Northern California is quite different from Southern California. Voters’ needs vary from place to place. Perhaps then, localized voting reform is where it’s at. State officials probably know what their voters need better than federal officials do.

For this reason, over-zealous federal regulation of voting may be a bad idea. The centralization and standardization of voting may disenfranchise some voters. The needs of the elderly, the poor, and the non-English speaking may be overlooked by the feds. States (and even better, counties) know their populations’ special needs.

A Happy Medium?

HAVA itself presents a happy medium between complete state independence and total federal regulation. It says, “let the states do their thing under the guidance of the Election Administration Commission" (ok, it doesn’t say it like that). “Reform" is more likely to help less educated voters, relatively new immigrants with English language problems, and the elderly. Therefore, the political party that wants those voters wants HAVA reform. The political party that feels it is less likely to get those voters anyway is not interested in making changes. Especially problematic is voter training. Counties that have the majority now are not so interested in getting new voters used to the new machines.

Without the EAC, states are not getting the money, guidance, or discipline (ah-hem New York) that they need. Eventually, the federal government will instate the EAC. Let’s just hope it isn’t after the next election.

Find out what is happening in your county and your state? Who rules the roost? Make yourself heard. Volunteer to help with voter education and training. From here, you can read more about voting rights, discuss with other WomenMatter readers on one of our online forums, and/or contact your representatives to let them know what you think.

Update Posted on: 9/18/2003

click here to go to next section

return to top