• Mission & Governance
• Services Overview
• How to Get Involved
• Standing Committees
• NCSL Foundation

• Issue Areas: A-Z
• State-Federal Relations
• NCSL Standing Committees
• News from D.C. and the States

• About State Legislatures
• Elections, Campaigns & Redistricting
• NCSL's StateConnect Directory
• Web Sites

• Online Guide to NCSL Services
• Staff Sections and Networks
• Meetings & Professional Development
• Staff Directories

• Meetings Calendar
• Online Registration
• Meetings Home Page
• Legislative Summit

• Bookstore
• State Legislatures Magazine
• NCSL's StateConnect Directory

NCSL Elections Reform Task Force

Introductions and Opening Remarks

Representative Dan Blue and Speaker Martin Stephens called the meeting to order and thanked members for making the extraordinary effort to be in Washington for the first meeting.

For a list of members and others attending, see APPENDIX A.

NCSL President Jim Costa and NCSL Staff Chair Diane Bolender thanked Task Force members for their willingness to participate in the important effort of looking at state election laws and procedures. They emphasized the regional and partisan diversity of the Task Force and asked members to approach the job with the seriousness and attention that it commands.

Speaker Stephens outlined three key goals of the Task Force:

The Speaker underscored the fact that voting is the foundation of democracy and that it is up to legislatures to make the necessary changes to restore confidence in the election process.

Maryland Secretary of State John Willis presented slides outlining the efforts of the National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) and their preliminary recommendations on election reform. The Association has established an ongoing committee to continue study. The NASS initial Task Force consisted of ten members. They formed three working groups: pre-election day, election day and post-election. The bulk of the Task Force work was during an intensive 2-day retreat that was facilitated by a consultant.

Secretary Willis emphasized the need to modernize voting equipment and presented evidence that voting machines can have an effect on reducing errors in counting ballots. He stated that the elections infrastructure is in desperate need of attention and that the NASS committee would examine the need for increased funding to upgrade voting equipment. Other areas that the NASS committee will look at are:

He suggested that states need to examine some specific issues such as:

Secretary Willis talked about "no votes" (sometimes referred to as "undervotes") and offered data showing that the type of voting machine has a strong correlation with the incidence of spoiled ballots.

Secretary Willis concluded by stating his hope that the national organizations of state and local officials can work together in the elections reform arena. He also stressed the need for state and local governments to have a unified voice when addressing Congressional proposals.

The Task Force agreed to hold the next two meetings on March 31^st and April 21^st (modified on Saturday morning to April 28^th). The consensus was to meet independent of other NCSL meetings and to convene in central locations. It was decided to try to hold meetings on Saturdays with some Friday afternoon sessions. Speaker Stephens said he hopes that the Task Force can accomplish its work in 5 to 6 meetings and be mostly done by the NCSL annual meeting on August 11^th in San Antonio.

Professor Smolka began his remarks by stating the 2000 election was indeed a good election when considered in an historic context. The closeness of the presidential outcome cast the spotlight on the election process. Florida was not even the closest state in terms of the White House race. That honor went to New Mexico. He reminded the Task Force that there have been numerous close elections through history.

Smolka identified various areas he thinks states should review.

He insisted that a guiding principle in elections reform efforts should be that "one size does not fit all." He downplayed the need to focus exclusively on voting machines and encouraged the Task Force to look at the overall process. He did call attention to a recent report on voting machines by a committee of experts working for the University of California and MIT. That report is on the Internet and linked from the NCSL Elections Task Force page at www.ncsl.org .

Susan Parnas Frederick, NCSL staff, gave a thorough run down of elections related bills pending in the U.S. Congress. Federal legislation falls into three categories:

Bills establishing study commissions and providing money to implement reforms seem to be the most popular and have the greatest chance of success. Some of the single subject bills could be attached to a comprehensive piece of legislation. For a more complete rundown of major bills that could eventually pass see Appendix B.

NCSL staffers Jennie Drage and Tim Storey offered an overview of state election laws and pending reform legislation. A survey of state elections laws shows that states take a wide variety of approaches in running elections based on the history and culture of the state.

Approximately 1,200 election reform bills have been introduced in state legislatures so far in 2001 (not including bills addressing campaign finance reform or the initiative and referendum process). The most common subject of these bills is the establishment of task forces, study commissions, and interim committees. At least 58 bills proposing studies of election laws have been proposed in 22 states. Common areas that states want to study are: Internet voting, voting system technology, increasing voter turnout, registration processes, recount procedures, and training for poll workers. For a complete summary of reform bills pending before legislatures, see Appendix C.

Oregon Representative Bruce Starr reported on the unique all mail-in ballot system employed by the state and cautioned against a simple analysis of voter turnout. Rep. Starr said that the turnout was due in part to an aggressive effort to purge voter rolls. The mail ballot system evolved from a very open absentee ballot system. Rep. Starr described the system and highlighted some of the problems encountered in going to an all mail system. He stated his desire for the Task Force to play an important role with regard to federal legislation.

Frank Parisi said the most important purpose of the Task Force is emphasizing the sacred right of Americans to vote.

Indiana Senator Sue Landske talked about Indiana's efforts to revise procedures for purging voter rolls. She is interested in having the Task Force look at voting technology and innovative ways to staff polling places. She would also like the Task Force to study polling hours and the storage of election materials.

Nebraska Senate Speaker Doug Kristensen called for the collection of strong data on options for reform and observed that "bad facts make for bad law." He said that a goal of election reform should be finding ways to educate the public about the fact that the system will never be perfect. He stressed the need for voter education and said that the Task Force should be a resource for best practices. The Task Force should closely monitor Congress and be proactive in identifying appropriate areas for uniformity in state laws.

Connecticut Representative Alex Knopp submitted that his state was one of the few with uniform voting technology and that Connecticut is trying to implement a statewide voter database. He suggested four items for the Task Force to focus on:

Mary Janicki said that the Task Force should not be overly focused on voting technology and should narrow its focus to three or four key issues. She would like to see the Task Force explore the issue of recruiting and training poll workers.

P.K. Jameson called attention to a report prepared by a Task Force appointed by Florida Governor Jeb Bush on election's procedures in the state. She said the Task Force should look at the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Bush vs. Gore to consider if standardized voting systems are required to comply with the equal protection provisions of the Constitution. She would also like for the Task Force to consider voting technology with an eye toward what is currently in development and when systems might become obsolete. Florida will lease optical scan machines for future elections. She listed poll worker recruitment and training along with voter education as other topics for the Task Force to consider.

Diane Bolender called on the Task Force to continue to monitor proposed federal legislation and make sure that anything that might pass is palatable for the states.

Mississippi Senator Hob Bryan expressed concerns over the perceived need for national uniformity in election laws. He observed that states vary greatly in their cultures and traditions and that the federal government must take these differences into account when considering legislation. The Task Force should be a forum to share good ideas between the states.

Tennessee Senator Steve Cohen said that the main focus of the Task Force should be the identification of best practices. He said the Task Force should consider whether legislation or regulation is needed to deal with problems. Perhaps the federal government should provide money for training poll workers.

Gerry Cohen called for a review of state constitutions to find out what reforms would be allowable without constitutional amendment. He said that some proposed federal reforms might be contrary to state constitutions. He noted that there are only a handful of voting machine vendors and the federal government might need to guarantee purchasing levels. He noted that longer polling hours could cause problems in terms of poll workers especially because of the reliance on elderly Americans to staff polls. Maybe there could be a network of PC type voting machines that could be used for other purposes between elections?

Denise DeCook stated that there is a breakdown of the election infrastructure. She said that the Task Force should perhaps consider the following issues: ballot privacy, uniformity of elections versus the need for diversity, and the broad area of technology and whether it has kept up. She suggested that the Task Force might want to divide into three areas of focus:

Denise reminded the Task Force that elections reforms are likely to have political ramifications, and those cannot be ignored.

Texas Representative Debra Danburg noted that states should pass prospective legislation that anticipates federal changes. We should keep in mind that this is redistricting season when working with the Congress. She would like the Task Force to look at the benefits of sending out pre-election voting materials. She also wants to carefully examine issues of disenfranchisement. Because Houston is currently exploring the purchase of new voting machines and it is in such a large county, Rep. Danburg suggested it would be a good site to meet. She suggested that maybe Congress should make election day a national holiday to encourage people to vote and make it easier to hire poll workers.

Steve McNett emphasized that the Task Force should make priorities and not "reinvent the wheel." He called for an inventory of current state laws. He suggested that the Task Force should look at issues related to the equal protection clause and what happens when votes are counted and recounted multiple times.

Larry Sheingold reminded the Task Force that its work would help define the NCSL organization and this was important to think about as the things move along. He underscored Denise's observation that reforms have political impact and that must be considered.

Bill Pound said the Task Force should do its work and think about what should be done relative to federal legislation. He also said that best practices might be helpful to states over time and highlighted the early voting system in Colorado.

Speaker Stephens concluded the roundtable by suggesting that the Task Force review the NCSL policy on federal elections legislation at the next meeting. He also said the idea of focusing on the three areas of pre-election, Election Day and post-election might be the way to go.

Mr. Hawkins discussed the reform efforts of his organization in cooperation with the National Association of Counties. Some of the reforms they are looking at are:

He reported that the NACo Task Force would meet at the end of April in Portland, Oregon. He also encouraged the national organizations to work together and perhaps form a coalition.

Members Present:

Ex Officio Members Present:

Others:

There are three big senate bills that are some form of the federal commission plus money model. They are:

On the House side, there are several interesting proposal which I will only mention briefly because they aren't moving.

Approximately 1,200 election reform bills have been introduced in state legislatures so far in 2001 (not including bills addressing campaign finance reform or the initiative and referendum process). Every state has election reform legislation this year. Some of the states with the most reform proposals are Hawaii, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Jersey, New York, Texas, Virginia, and Washington. All of these states have over 50 bills pending.

By far the most common subject of these bills is the establishment of task forces, study commissions, and interim committees. At least 58 bills proposing studies of election laws have been proposed in 22 states. The intense media and public scrutiny of election laws that has gone on since the drawn-out presidential election last year has clearly placed pressure on legislatures to act, and taking the time to study the situation is a pragmatic first step. Some of the studies are broad in nature, looking at election procedures as a whole. Others focus on more specific areas, including:

A few states are considering sweeping election reform bills. These bills encompass everything from registration procedures to announcing election results, and everything in between. Most bills, however, focus on narrower topics. They tend to reflect problems that were highlighted in the 2000 elections, or are modeled after successful programs in other states. These include: