The New Hanging Chads? Provisional Ballots May Cause Problems in November 2004

In the 2000 presidential election, an estimated 3 million people were unable to vote although they were properly registered and went to the polls.

Due to clerical mistakes, database errors, and other relatively small snafus, many eligible voters didn’t appear on eligible voter lists and were turned away from their polling places before they could dimple a chad.

So in 2002, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), which, among other things, required states to provide voters with a safeguard known as "provisional voting" in all federal elections.

This means that if you show up at the polls and your name is missing from the eligible voter list, you can fill out a provisional ballot which will be verified and counted later.

Or will it?

Are provisional ballots the new hanging chads?

Voting-rights advocates fear that provisional ballots will not be counted properly in the upcoming, super-close presidential election.

That’s because provisional voting leaves lots of room for human error: each provisional ballot must be checked for voter eligibility and then hand counted. This process may end up being as problematic and politicized in November 2004 as the Florida recount was in 2000, says Doug Chapin, director of the Election Reform Information Project.

Already, provisional voting has ignited debate. In a local Chicago election in March 2004, 93 percent of provisional ballots were thrown out, according to The New York Times.

Many of the ballots were disqualified because they had been cast in the wrong polling place, but some say that this is the fault of election officials and not of the voting public.

Often, voters have trouble finding out where they are supposed to vote and when they show up at the wrong polling place, no one there is able to direct them to the right one.

Voting rights advocates say that election officials should count provisional ballots without regard to where they are cast, or, they should have a procedure to direct voters to their appropriate polling places. But, advocates say, it’s not fair that officials have no system to guide voters to their correct precinct and that they throw out ballots cast in the wrong precinct.

Vote centers

Vote centers are a possible solution to this catch 22.

In order to control costs, election officials in Larimer County, Colorado got rid of assigned polling places and opened vote centers. Voters can choose from any of the 16 locations available, which are electronically linked to each other and to the county poll book. Voters who are not on the eligible voter list can fill out provisional ballots, which will then be checked for eligibility without concern for precinct.

Larimer County Clerk Scott Doyle says that this system addresses HAVA’s provisional voting requirement, cuts costs, and increases voter turnout because voters like the convenience of choosing where to vote.

But some say that vote centers may make it harder for the elderly and disabled to get to the polls.

In May 2004, Colorado Governor Bill Owens signed legislation that allows Colorado counties to create vote centers or to combine polling places. In some counties, this may mean fewer voting locations overall, which, for some, could mean traveling a longer distance to vote.

This could be a problem for those who are less mobile, says Cathryn Hazouri, executive director for the ACLU of Colorado. Hazouri is also concerned that the shift to vote centers may confuse voters -- she doubts that the state will properly educate voters about the change.

All voting reforms have their pros and cons

While everyone agrees that the voting system must be reformed, it’s hard to agree on just how to do it. All voting reforms have their pros and cons, and any change to the system could potentially confuse voters. Legislators, election officials, and we, the people, must weigh the positives and negatives of any reform and decide if it will improve or impede our democracy.

Most feel that provisional voting is necessary because it protects the civil rights of eligible voters. It also provides a quick resolution to election-day disputes between voters and poll workers. However, provisional ballots are likely to delay election results and to impose additional costs (for materials and extra staff hours) on already cash-strapped states.

It’s up to states to implement HAVA’s provisional voting requirement in a way that works. Are vote centers the answer? Should states come up with a fool-proof way for voters to find their correct precinct? What can states do to ensure that provisional ballots are counted properly?

The people who are most likely to have trouble with new voting systems and new locations are the less educated and the elderly. Not everyone wants them to vote. That is why the Congress was not able to establish national voting standards and ended up leaving it to the states. The majority party in each state sets the standards and decides whether to make voting easier or not. Check it out in your county.

And, most importantly, do your friends and family know that they can fill out a provisional ballot if they show up to the polls and their name isn’t on the voter list? Discuss this option with them, because, when it comes to voting, what you don’t know can hurt you.

WomenMatter suggests that all of us sign up as poll watchers and also in the weeks before the election volunteer to teach people who might need help in managing the new machines and finding the new locations.

You can also discuss these issues with other WomenMatter readers by logging on to one of our online forums.

To continue to educate yourself on voting rights issues, click here.

You can also sign up for an e alert, and we’ll keep you posted. And don’t forget to register to vote and contact your representatives, because your voice matters.

WomenMatter is dedicated to empowering women to participate in the political process. To make a donation, click here.

Update Posted on: 8/27/2004