• 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

Contents

List of Tables
Preface and Acknowledgements
About the Report
Principles of the Election Process in the United States
Executive Summary and Task Force Recommendations
NCSL Official Policy on Federal Election Reform Legislation
Introduction

1. Voter Rights and Responsibilities
2. Election Administration and Officials
3. Voter Registration
4. Provisional Ballots
5. Absentee and Early Voting
6. Voter Assistance and Polling Place Accessibility
7. Voting Systems
8. Post-Election Procedures
9. Election Day Workers
10. Voter Education

List of Tables

Table 1. Same-Day Registration States
Table 2. Voter Registration Deadlines
Table 3. Central, Statewide Voter Registration Systems
Table 4. Provisional Ballots
Table 5. Absentee Ballot Deadlines
Table 6. Counting Absentee Ballots
Table 7. Absentee Voting
Table 8. Early Voting
Table 9. Absentee and Early Votes Cast in 2000 Election
Table 10. Polling Place Accessibility and Voter Assistance
Table 11. Costs Associated with Certain Types of Voting Equipment Machine Type
Table 12. Reliability Associated with Certain Types of Voting Equipment in Florida in the 2000 Election
Table 13. Average Residual Vote by Machine Type in U.S. Counties, 1988-2000 Presidential Elections
Table 14. Voting Systems
Table 15. Definition of Proper Ballot Markings
Table 16. Interpreting Variations from Prescribed Ballot Markings
Table 17. Definition of a Valid Vote on Optical Scan Systems
Table 18. Definition of a Valid Vote on Punch Card Systems
Table 19. Definition of a Valid Vote with Paper Ballots
Table 20. Automatic Recounts
Table 21. Recount Provisions – Part 1
Table 22. Recount Provisions -- Part 2
Table 23. Post-Election Certification Timetable
Table 24. Post-Election Recount/Contest Timetable
Table 25. Qualifications for Election Day Workers
Table 26. Rates of Pay for Election Day Workers
Table 27. Election Day Workers
Table 28. Student Election Day Workers

Preface and Acknowledgements

The NCSL Elections Reform Task Force faced a daunting task to accomplish its work in just over six months at the same time that many state legislatures were in session. Under the remarkable and committed leadership of co-chairs Representative Dan Blue, Speaker Marty Stephens and Butch Speer, the Task Force was able to narrow the topic to the most important issues and arrive at consensus on a number of core recommendations. This was all done in a relatively short time frame. Members of the Task Force sacrificed precious time to attend and participate in meetings. Task Force members also reviewed voluminous materials including a draft of the final report and recommendations. NCSL is indebted to every one of the Task Force members who took the time to travel to meetings and provide feedback on drafts of the report.

Anyone with knowledge in elections has been in high demand for the past seven months, so the Task Force was fortunate to gain the insight of many individuals who took the time to appear before the committee and share their expertise. The Task Force is very grateful to all of the witnesses who contributed their time.

Many others helped by offering input and feedback, including legislative staff in all 50 states who took valuable time to review and confirm data for individual states. The response by legislative staff and state elections administrators was outstanding and helped bolster the quality of the information tremendously.

NCSL is also grateful to Doug Lewis, the Executive Director of the Houston based Election Center. The Election Center compiles professional practices papers that were a gold mine of innovative practices. Many of those innovative practices are referenced throughout this report.

A number of NCSL staff supported the Task Force in its work including Jennie Drage, Kate Rooney and Tim Storey from the NCSL Denver office and Susan Frederick and Alysoun McLaughlin from the Washington, D.C. office. Leann Stelzer from NCSL’s publications department helped edit and prepare the report for publication.

About the Report

After holding six meetings and hearing expert testimony on some of the problems with the election process in the U.S., the NCSL Elections Reform Task Force decided to focus its recommendations on the ten subject areas listed below.

• Voter Rights and Responsibilities
• Election Administration
• Voter Registration
• Provisional Ballots
• Absentee and Early Voting
• Voter Assistance and Polling Place Accessibility
• Voting Systems
• Post-Election Procedures
• Election Day Workers
• Voter Education

The chapters conclude with resource materials that were prepared by staff for the Task Force to use in formulating the recommendations. The resource materials provide a brief overview of the topic along with more in-depth discussions of innovative models being used by states. In the resource materials for many chapters, fifty-state tables on specific statutory issues are included. The resource materials include recommendations from other published reports on election reform that are pertinent to the topic. There are short summaries of state legislative action through August 2001.

Principles of the Election Process in the United States--Adopted by the NCSL Elections Reform Task Force

1. The right to vote is perhaps the most basic and fundamental of all the rights guaranteed by the U.S. democratic form of government. Implicit in that right is the right to have one’s vote count and the right to have as nearly perfect an election proceeding as can be provided.
2. Administering the election process is the responsibility of the individual states.
3. Voting methods for elections should be fair, reliable, and ensure the equal protection of voting opportunity.
4. Every citizen deserves an easy, open, and understandable avenue to vote.

1. No jurisdiction should use voter rolls in any manner that will discourage citizens from registering to vote.
2. In the states that maintain registration rolls:

1. voter registration is voluntary; and
2. each citizen has a responsibility to comply with reasonable administrative requirements established by the state of his or her residence.
3. voter registration rolls should be maintained so as to protect the integrity and accuracy of the process while preserving the right of eligible voters to cast their ballots. Registration processes should help eliminate fraud.

1. A registration process should facilitate the exercise of voting rights and not hinder the exercise of the right to vote.

1. Every eligible voter should have the opportunity to vote.
2. Every vote must count.
3. Voting should be a simple, convenient, and user-friendly process that encourages each citizen to express his or her choices.
4. Voters deserve open, barrier-free access to the polls.
5. Voting systems should be chosen to:
i. allow voters to clearly and easily express their vote; and
ii. accurately record such votes.
6. States that use different voting systems in different jurisdictions should strive to minimize any disparate impacts of those systems.

1. Rules regarding post-election challenges should be easily interpreted and available prior to the election.
2. The processes for counting and recounting ballots in an election must be governed by uniform standards.
3. States should clearly define what constitutes a vote.

Following the controversial 2000 election for president of the United States, it became clear that every state needed to undertake an exhaustive review of how elections are conducted. Most states have embarked on that review and many enacted legislation in early 2001 aimed at modernizing the election process. Fair elections are the foundation of a sound democracy, and state legislatures are ultimately responsible for making sure that the laws governing the election process guarantee free and fair elections.

The leadership of the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) committed the Conference to exploring ways that states can continue to improve election laws and administration. NCSL President, California State Senator Jim Costa, and NCSL Staff Chair, Diane Bolender from Iowa, established the NCSL Elections Reform Task Force in December 2000. They asked the Task Force to focus on three goals: helping restore confidence in the election system, working with the federal government and providing states with recommendations for improving the election process.

The Task Force worked steadily for the first half of 2001 and adopted 36 recommendations for state legislators seeking to improve the election process. The recommendations stemmed directly from a set of ten core principles, adopted by the Task Force, beginning with, "The right to vote is perhaps the most basic and fundamental of all rights guaranteed by the U.S. democratic form of government." Recommendations were made in ten specific issue areas.

Voter Rights and Responsibilities

Recommendation 1.1: States should adopt a list of voter rights and responsibilities.

Recommendation 1.2: States should disseminate the list of voter rights and responsibilities.

Election Administration

Recommendation 2.1: States should collect and archive election data, including:

• Error rates, undervotes and overvotes for each voting system; and

• Number of persons presenting themselves to vote.

Recommendation 2.3: States should establish guidelines to ensure an adequate number of polling places and their efficient operation.

Recommendation 2.4: State election officials should not be allowed to campaign in partisan elections, other than their own, where applicable.

Voter Registration

Recommendation 3.1: States should develop a statewide, electronic registration database.

Recommendation 3.2: Registration databases should be constantly maintained to ensure the integrity of the process.

Recommendation 3.3: Registration databases should be easily accessible from all polling places.

Recommendation 3.4: States should improve communication between polling places and central election offices.

Recommendation 3.5: Registration lists should not be used in any way that might discourage voter participation.

Provisional Ballots

Recommendation 4.1: States should provide a uniform method, by voting system, to allow voters to cast a provisional ballot at the polling place if their eligibility to vote is in question, thus resulting in the denial of their opportunity to cast a standard ballot.

Recommendation 4.2: States should have a uniform method to judge and count provisional ballots.

Absentee and Early Voting

Recommendation 5.1: Requirements for absentee voting should not be intimidating nor discourage participation.

Recommendation 5.2: States should adopt no-excuse, absentee voting and early voting procedures.

Recommendation 5.3: States should enact legislation that will accommodate military and overseas voters in every way possible.

Voter Assistance and Polling Place Accessibility

Recommendation 6.1: State and local election officials should ensure nondiscriminatory, equal access to the election system for all voters, including elderly, disabled, military and overseas voters.

Recommendation 6.2: States should ensure voters have full accessibility to polling places.

Recommendation 6.3: States should permit disabled voters to apply for permanent absentee voting status.

Recommendation 6.4: States should provide, upon request, a method of casting a secret ballot to all voters with disabilities.

Recommendation 6.5: States should ensure that ballot instructions can be read and understood with minimal assistance by people who have a low level of English proficiency.

Voting Systems

Recommendation 7.1: States should adopt uniform standards for maintenance, operation, counting (including what constitutes a vote), security, verification, accuracy, and ballot design for each type of voting system used in the state.

Recommendation 7.2: States should collect and promulgate statewide election statistics by type of equipment used.

Recommendation 7.3: States should monitor the emergence of new technologies that provide alternative methods for conducting elections and implement those which will improve the election process.

Post-Election Procedures

Recommendation 8.1: States should adopt uniform procedures for recounts.

Recommendation 8.2: States should define when a candidate has a right to contest an election and the procedures for calling for a recount.

Recommendation 8.3: States should examine schedules for challenging elections and enact clear deadlines for resolving disputed races.

Election Day Workers

Recommendation 9.1: States should develop more extensive programs to train election day workers to properly interact with voters.

Recommendation 9.2: States should remove barriers to the recruitment of election day workers.

Recommendation 9.3: States should assist in funding the recruitment, training and retention of election day workers.

Recommendation 9.4: Election day workers should be educated about disability etiquette and how to best serve voters with disabilities.

Recommendation 9.5: States should establish a policy requiring a sufficient number of election day workers at each polling place.

Voter Education

Recommendation 10.1: States should place renewed emphasis on voter education.

Recommendation 10.2: If necessary, state funds should be available to assist units of government to carry out the critical mission of educating voters.

Recommendation 10.3: Public resources spent on voter education should be expended fairly and in a politically neutral manner.

Recommendation 10.4: When voting equipment or procedures are changed, states should direct additional voter education efforts toward ensuring voter familiarity with the new equipment or procedures.

In addition to these recommendations, the Task Force identified some of the innovative approaches that many state and local governments are already employing to make elections run smoothly. Legislatures must proactively review how elections are conducted and make necessary changes appropriate to the specific circumstances in a given state.

1. NCSL acknowledges that a national debate on election reform has begun and that any Congressionally mandated changes in election processes necessarily will impact state and local elections. The NCSL Task Force recognizes that state law controls the processes and the administration of matters pertaining to federal, state, and local elections. It logically follows that NCSL, as the national voice of the various state legislatures, should be at the center of this national debate.
2. NCSL finds that most of the significant federal legislation introduced in the 107^th Congress contains guidelines for the formation of an election commission or task force to examine election issues and to develop guidelines or mandates for federal elections which necessarily will affect state and local elections. NCSL recognizes Congress’ desire to have a voice in the national debate on election reform and understands the formation of a federal commission or task force to provide such a voice may be inevitable. NCSL believes that it must be an equal partner within any such federal commission or task force because this effort must be a partnership among federal, state, and local officials.

Should Congress move forward with election reform legislation that requires the formation of a federal commission or task force to examine election reform issues in the states, NCSL will lend its support to such effort only if state legislators are included in the composition of any such commission or task force.

3. NCSL acknowledges that, due to events surrounding the last presidential election, public confidence in the election process must be restored. NCSL recognizes that states may need federal block grant funding to assist in the implementation of new and innovative election reform procedures. NCSL also believes that such funding should be based on broad principles, not upon specific mandates which would lead to a "one size fits all" approach to elections. Therefore, NCSL supports a block grant formula which awards money to states for broad-based purposes dealing with election reform, and opposes any funding mechanism, which seeks to mandate specific requirements on the states.
4. NCSL is of the opinion that the creation of another new agency to administer these block grants is unnecessary, believing that the Federal Elections Commission may be the most appropriate federal agency to administer any such federal block grant program.
5. NCSL supports federal block grant funding to states for the following broad purposes:

• Improving election technology, systems and ballot design;
• Facilitating voter registration, verification and maintenance of voter rolls;
• Improving the accuracy and security of election procedures and vote counts;
• Educating citizens on representative democracy and election processes and systems;
• Providing greater access to voter registration and polling places especially for rural and disabled voters; and
• Providing training and education opportunities for elections personnel.

6. NCSL encourages Congress to amend the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) to grant states greater latitude to remove ineligible voters from voter rolls.
7. NCSL supports increased funding for the FEC Office of Election Administration for the development of voluntary equipment standards and the dissemination of election-related statistics and information.

In the wake of the problems that surfaced in the extraordinary 2000 election for president of the United States, California Senator Jim Costa, President of the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) called for the formation of an Elections Reform Task Force. "The Florida election drama and the U.S. Supreme Court decision on December 12 demonstrated a need for states to review their election laws and procedures," said NCSL President Jim Costa. "We believe this effort is worth committing the resources of our organization to ensure that states have the tools and information they need to undertake this critical effort." Senator Costa and the NCSL Staff Chair Diane Bolender appointed members to the Task Force and gave them a challenge to make recommendations to states on how to improve the election process and restore confidence to the American people that elections are efficiently run and beyond reproach.

The Task Force was formed on the assumption that states are the appropriate level of government for enacting any necessary election reforms. The framers of the U.S. Constitution intended for the states to oversee the administration of elections, and states have done so with amazing success for more than 200 years. State legislators proactively began examining their election codes as the events of the 2000 election unfolded. In the 2001 legislative sessions an unprecedented 1700 pieces of legislation were filed around the country to alter the election process. More than 250 of those bills passed. Many state legislatures established interim study committees to explore reforms.

Not every state needs to overhaul the election process; many states already have implemented very modern and progressive reforms putting them on sound footing. However, every state needs to carefully review its election laws given the events of the 2000 election and make deliberate changes to address specific problems.

Chaired by North Carolina Representative Dan Blue, Utah Speaker of the House Marty Stephens and Louisiana Clerk of the House Alfred Speer, the Task Force was a bipartisan group of 30 state legislators and legislative staff from around the country.

Senator Costa and NCSL Staff Chair Diane Bolender set three goals for the Task Force:

• To restore faith and public confidence in state election systems.
• To ensure that election reform on the federal level complements state efforts, does not pre-empt state authority and allows states the ability to be innovative.
• To provide states with important information on methods and best practices to address election reforms.

• March 2-3, 2001 in Washington, D.C.
• March 31, 2001 in Chicago, Illinois
• April 28, 2001 in Atlanta, Georgia
• May 9, 2001 in Washington, D.C.
• June 8-9, 2001 in Denver, Colorado
• July 9-10, 2001 in Washington, D.C.

Stephen Ansolabehere, Caltech-MIT Voting, Project, Massachusetts
Kimball Brace, Election Data Systems, Washington, D.C.
Roman Buhler, House Administration Committee, Washington, D.C.
Honorable Donetta Davidson, Secretary of State, Colorado
James Dickson, National Organization on Disability, Washington, D.C.
Jennie Drage, NCSL-Denver
Lance Gough, Chicago Board of Election Commissioners, Illinois
Ernest R. Hawkins, National Association of County Records and Clerks, California
State Senator David Jordan, Greenwood County Voting Assistance League, Mississippi
Chet Kalis, House Administration Committee, Washington, D.C.
Alysoun McLaughlin, NCSL-D.C.
Langdon Neal, Chicago Board of Election Commissioners, Illinois
Susan Parnas-Frederick, NCSL-D.C.
Nate Persily, University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania
Kate Rooney, NCSL-Denver
Ion V. Sancho, Leon County Supervisor of Elections, Florida
Richard Schum, Internet Policy Institute, Washington, D.C.
Lee Slater, Accenture, Oklahoma
James C. Smith, Governor's Select Task Force on Elections Procedures, Standards & Technology, Florida
Richard Smolka, Election Administration Reports, Washington, D.C.
Tim Storey, NCSL-Denver
Christopher Thomas, Bureau of Elections, Michigan
Honorable John T. Willis, Secretary of State, Maryland

The Task Force adopted 36 recommendations for state legislatures that are looking for guidance on specific ways to improve the election process. Those recommendations were based on a set of core principles adopted by the Task Force at its meeting in Denver, Colorado. The Task Force adopted recommendations centered on ten topic areas. The Task Force also drafted a policy for NCSL to use in working with the federal government. The Law and Justice Committee of NCSL’s Assembly on Federal Issues approved that policy at its meeting in May 2001. The Task Force added to the federal policy in July 2001, and those additions will be taken up at the NCSL business meeting in August 2001.

Principle:

The right to vote is perhaps the most basic and fundamental of all the rights guaranteed by the U.S. democratic form of government. Implicit in that right is the right to have one’s vote count and the right to have as nearly perfect an election proceeding as can be provided.

Recommendations:
 

Recommendation 1.1: States should adopt a list of voter rights and responsibilities. Recommendation 1.2: States should disseminate the list of voter rights and responsibilities.

Example of Best Practices:

Voter Rights*

Registered voters have the right to:

1. Vote and have the vote accurately counted.
2. Cast a vote if in line at the designated poll closing time.
3. Ask for and receive assistance in voting.
4. Receive replacement ballots if a mistake is made prior to the ballot being cast.
5. Receive an explanation if their registration is in question.
6. Cast a provisional ballot if their registration is in question.
7. Prove their identity if an election official doubts the voter’s identity.
8. Receive written instructions to use when voting and, upon request, oral instructions on voting from election officials.
9. Vote free from coercion or intimidation by election officials or any other person.
10. Vote with equipment that is in working condition and that will allow votes to be accurately cast.
11. Expect government to fulfill its responsibilities with regard to voter education.
12. Expect a sufficient number of properly trained election day workers.
13. Cast a vote in a barrier-free environment regardless of any physical disability.
14. Be treated with courtesy by election officials.

Registered voters have the responsibility to:

1. Make informed choices about candidates and issues.
2. Exercise the right to vote.
3. Keep their voter registration information current.
4. Know their voting precinct and the hours of operation.
5. Bring proper identification to the polling place as required by law.
6. Know how to operate voting equipment properly.
7. Treat election day workers with courtesy.
8. Respect the privacy of other voters.
9. Report problems with the process or violations of election law.
10. Ask questions when confused.
11. Check completed ballot for accuracy.

Overview

In election reform legislation passed by the Florida legislature in the 2001 session, a Voter’s Bill of Rights and Responsibilities was included. The outline of rights and responsibilities was compiled using recommendations from the Florida Governor’s Select Task Force. Various items addressed in the Florida Voter’s Bill of Rights and Responsibilities--such as a voter’s responsibility to keep registration records updated--are dispersed throughout many state statutes. Few, if any, states have developed a list like Florida’s. Some states require that instructions for voters be posted at poll sites. These instructions often include voting procedures and expectations and responsibilities of voters. Examples of items found in voter instructions include:

• How to obtain assistance when voting, and
• How to obtain a ballot and vote without outside influence.

The NACo/NACRC National Commission on Election Standards and Reformrecommended that:

Legislation addressing voter rights and responsibilities was introduced in five states. Examples of legislation that passed include:

• Florida required the Secretary of State to set standards for voter education and county election supervisors to implement voter education. The programs should include but not be limited to education on registration, polling place, absentee balloting procedures, voter rights and responsibilities, sample ballots and public service announcements.

• Texas established a hotline for the reporting of an existing or potential abuse of voter rights.

2. Election Administration and Officials

Principle:

Administering the election process is the responsibility of the individual states.

Election officials are fiduciaries of the citizens, and should exercise their duties in such a manner as to increase voter understanding of and confidence in the election process.

Recommendations:
 
 

Recommendation 2.1: States should collect and archive election data, including: Error rates, undervotes and overvotes for each voting system; and Number of persons presenting themselves to vote. Recommendation 2.2: States should examine election time frames with regard to all elections. Recommendation 2.3: States should establish guidelines to ensure an adequate number of polling places and their efficient operation. Recommendation 2.4: State election officials should not be allowed to campaign in partisan elections, other than their own, where applicable.

Examples of Best Practices:

• Establishing exit polling guidelines and distance limits.
• Consolidating elections to a limited number of dates in a calendar year.
• Establishing standards for the optimum number of registrants per precinct to ensure efficient election administration.
• Defining continuing education standards for election administration personnel.
• Prohibiting election officials from participating or engaging in any political activity, making or soliciting, any contributions for any political party, faction, or candidate, or taking active part in the management of the affairs of a political party, faction, candidate, or any political campaign in any election that is supervised, regulated, or conducted by the official’s office.
• Adopting a Code of Ethics for election officials (see NACo/NACRC report pages 5 and 12).

Overview

The conduct of elections in the United States remains extremely decentralized, with the federal government playing a very limited role. State and local governments divide the bulk of responsibility for conducting elections. Every state takes a slightly different approach in terms of dividing the actual duties. Both state and local governments share the costs of running elections, with counties providing the bulk of the money.

State Election Officials

In almost every state, it is the state government that has final authority on election administration. Generally, the secretaries of state are the top election officials in most states or play a key role.

• Thirty-six secretaries of state are elected statewide in a partisan election.
• In seven states, the secretary of state is appointed by the governor and approved by the legislature.
• In Texas, the governor appoints the secretary of state without legislative approval.
• In three states--Alaska, Hawaii and Utah--the lieutenant governor serves as the secretary of state.
• In Maine, New Hampshire, and Tennessee the legislature elects the secretary of state.

• The New York State Board of Elections is independent of the secretary of state and was formed nearly 30 years ago. The board is made up of four members appointed by governor and the legislature.

• The North Carolina State Board of Elections is the state agency charged with overall responsibility for administration of the election process. It is the only statutory, bipartisan, quasi-judicial supervisory board in North Carolina state government. The governor of North Carolina appoints the five members of the board.

• In Illinois, the governor appoints four members from his own political party and selects four from a list of nominees submitted to him by the highest ranking official of the opposite political party. Board members serve staggered, four-year terms.

The division of election responsibilities varies greatly from state to state. Typically, states must do the following:

Approve voting equipment (43 states),
Promulgate rules and regulations for the conduct of elections,
Certify official election results,
Approve ballot design,
Provide instruction and training to local officials,
Investigate complaints and voting irregularities, and
Approve statewide ballot language.

Local Role in Elections

There are 3,066 counties in the United States. They are the primary administrative units for conducting elections. In most counties, a board of election commissioners oversees the process. These election commissioners are elected in some states, appointed by county commissioners in some states and appointed by the governor in others. Most local election officials in the country are nonpartisan. In many states, the county clerk serves as the chief elections official for the county and most of them are elected on a nonpartisan basis.

Local responsibilities for elections typically include:

• Count and tabulate votes and report results to the state;
• Recruit, hire and train election day workers;
• Handle voter registration and maintain voter rolls;
• Purchase equipment and supplies; and
• Prepare ballots for the election.

Revitalizing Democracy in Florida: The Governor’s Select Task Force on Election Procedures, Standards and Technology recommended that:

More than 100 bills were introduced in 2001 legislative sessions to change election administration. Few changes regarding

• Georgia passed legislation that prohibits the Secretary of State from serving a fiduciary role in any campaign of a candidate for an office that must be certified by the Secretary of State.

3. Voter Registration

Principle:

Every citizen deserves an easy, open, and understandable avenue to vote.

1. No jurisdiction should use voter rolls in any manner that will discourage citizens from registering to vote.
2. In the states that maintain registration rolls:

1. voter registration is voluntary; and
2. each citizen has a responsibility to comply with reasonable administrative requirements established by the state of his or her residence.
3. voter registration rolls should be maintained so as to protect the integrity and accuracy of the process while preserving the right of eligible voters to cast their ballots. Registration processes should help eliminate fraud.

3. A registration process should facilitate the exercise of voting rights and not hinder the exercise of the right to vote.

Recommendation 3.1: States should develop a statewide, electronic registration database. Recommendation 3.2: Registration databases should be constantly maintained to ensure the integrity of the process. Recommendation 3.3: Registration databases should be easily accessible from all polling places. Recommendation 3.4: States should improve communication between polling places and central election offices. Recommendation 3.5: Registration lists should not be used in any way that might discourage voter participation.

Examples of Best Practices:

• Increasing communication between agency databases, such as the department of motor vehicles, the bureau of vital statistics, postal records, etc.
• Creating and maintaining a statewide registration database.
• Assigning a unique identifier to each registered voter.
• Training agency employees who are engaged in voter registration on the requirements of the NVRA.
• Mandating prompt transfer of voter registration information from agencies to election officials.

Overview

The passage of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) in 1993 created a degree of consistency in state voter registration and purging processes. It made registering to vote easier and more convenient, and the number of registered voters has increased since its passage. However, not all registered voters actually vote. The greatest difficulty states face under the NVRA is keeping registration rolls accurate and up-to-date. This is difficult because of the NVRA purging, notification, and reporting requirements.

Forty-three states are subject to NVRA requirements. Six states have same-day registration, which exempts them from the NVRA. North Dakota is also exempt because it does not have voter registration. NVRA requirements include:

• Expanded locations for voter registration, including driver’s license offices, public assistance offices and other public agencies, and military recruiting offices;
• Mail-in registration;
• Limits on purging; and
• Fail-safe voting procedures for registered voters who move within the same jurisdiction.

List Maintenance

Under the NVRA, a voter can be purged from the registration rolls only:

• At the request of the registrant;
• Because of mental incapacity;
• Because of a felony conviction;
• With the death of the registrant;
• Upon a change in the voter’s residence if:
• the registrant confirms the change in writing, or
• the registrant fails to respond to confirmation mailings and fails to vote in any election within two subsequent general federal elections.

Due to the increase in the number of election mailings required under the NVRA, Secretary Davidson and other state election officials support the implementation of a reduced postage rate for official election mailings.

Another difficulty is that most states are prohibited by law from using social security numbers in voter registration (only about half a dozen states can), and thus lack a unique identifier for each voter. State election officials generally support changing federal law to permit the use of social security numbers to identify voters.

Centralized Registration Databases

A centralized, statewide database was cited as a solution to some of the list maintenance complications created by the NVRA by several people who testified before the NCSL Elections Reform Task Force, including Stephen Ansolabehere of MIT, Secretary Davidson, and Michigan Director of Elections, Chris Thomas.

Twenty-seven states have a computerized system for storing voter registration data, although not all are truly centralized (some link county or municipal systems), and not all are online. At the April 28 meeting of the Elections Reform Task Force, Stephen Ansolabehere cited Kentucky, Michigan and Oklahoma as good models for centralized, statewide voter registration databases.

Advantages:

• It is easier to track voters as they move from jurisdiction to jurisdiction within the state, and keep their registration current.
• Communication among various government entities, such as the department of corrections and the state coroner, is easier and faster, resulting in more accurate purging of ineligible voters.
• Duplicate registrations are dramatically reduced.
• Errors and delays in forwarding paperwork are eliminated.
• There are cost savings at the local level, as the number of required mailings is reduced.

• Start-up costs are substantial; it cost Michigan $7.6 million to develop a database in 1995.
• Annual maintenance costs can be high; Michigan’s annual appropriation is $1.4 million.
• Switching to a centralized system requires cooperation among state and county election officials. Counties may be unwilling to give up the systems they use in favor of a state system.
• Using a centralized database requires developing a system for uniquely identifying each voter. This is most easily done with a social security number, but not all states can use those. Some citizens are opposed to using social security numbers for privacy reasons.

Six states have same-day registration (SDR), whereby any qualified resident of the state can go to the polls on election day then register and vote (see table 1).
 
 

Advantages:

• Same day registration leads to increased voter turnout. In the six SDR states and North Dakota, turnout is 10 percent to 17 percent higher than the national average. Minnesota estimates that election day registrations account for five percent to ten percent of voter turnout.
• Allowing people to register the same day they intend to vote is more convenient. It particularly benefits people who have difficulty getting to an office to register because of work or transportation conflicts and those who have recently moved.
• States have more control over their voter registration rolls because they are not subject to NVRA purging restrictions.

• SDR can be costly, because it requires:

• Additional poll workers,
• Additional ballots,
• Additional voting equipment, and
• Verification certificates and investigation costs.

• SDR must be adopted along with safeguards to prevent fraud.

State election officials from the same-day registration states and North Dakota contend that their registration procedures have not resulted in increased fraud. Safeguards against fraud in the SDR states:

• Require picture identification at polls.
• Require additional identification to verify address.
• Segregate SDR ballots, and refrain from counting them until verification certificates have been sent out and undeliverable ones are returned.
• Restrict sites at which one can register on election day.
• Implement minimum residency requirements.
• Prohibit changing party affiliation on primary day.

• State and enforce a deterrent penalty for fraud.

The Oregon Elections Task Force said:

The Constitution Project’s Voting Procedures Working Group said:

Twenty-seven states introduced legislation related to voter registration. Bills addressed a wide variety of topics such as creating or improving a centralized database, improving list maintenance procedures and implementing same-day registration. Legislation that passed includes:

• The Colorado legislature passed legislation providing that a computerized registration database be made available to all counties. The new system will replace an outdated system, and the secretary of state expects more counties to utilize the improved system.
• Indiana passed a similar measure creating a statewide voter registration file that counties can access using the Internet.
• Kansas established a procedure for county election officers to remove from permanent advance voter lists the names of persons who become inactive voters.
• South Dakota passed two bills that will completely revamp their system of voter registration. HB 1252 creates a centralized voter registration database in the secretary of state’s office. HB 1009 creates a process for keeping the centralized voter database up-to-date.
• Texas passed three registration bills. HB 2691 mandates that voter registration applications, including signatures, be transmitted electronically from driver’s license offices to election officials, speeding up the process. HB 2921 requires registrars to verify lists of ineligible voters that are obtained from private companies. HB 3181 improves procedures for maintaining voter registration rolls.
• Virginia passed a package of eleven bills to improve their registration system.
• Georgia, Kansas, Maryland, Montana, Vermont and Washington passed bills that improve the processes for keeping registration rolls up-to-date. These bills provide streamlined procedures for keeping track of voters who move, and purging deceased voters, convicted felons and other ineligible voters from the rolls.

Indiana’s Duplicate Voter Registration Elimination Project

Indiana has established a secure web site to help county offices eliminate duplicate registrations. It provides detailed information such as project documents, schedules and copies of the post card mailings. In the past, Indiana conducted mass mailings using the Postal Service’s national change of address (NCOA) files to update voter registration records. The state found that using NCOA was expensive and led to inaccurate data and confusion for county offices. To provide the counties with the best information possible, the state decided not to include the NCOA process in 2000. Indiana simplified the project to reduce confusion and improve communication. Now, it mails a postcard to all voters with the same first and last name and date of birth that lists all addresses for the matched names. The postcard asks the voter if each address is a current or former address, or if he or she never lived there. The voter’s registration information is updated based on the returned postcard.

Michigan’s Qualified Voter File

In 1995, Michigan developed a statewide centralized voter registration database, the qualified voter file (QVF). Besides its voter registration database, the QVF offers election officials around the state many election administration features, including absent voter ballot processing, petition and candidate tracking, election planning, and election inspector tracking. County and municipal clerks were provided with hardware and software for the system. Voter registration applications are entered electronically and updated daily. By tying voter files to driver’s license files, the state can keep track of voters and ensure that a voter who moves within the state has an opportunity to update his or her voter registration at the time of updating driver’s license information.
 

Mecklenburg County, North Carolina’s List Update Procedure

Mecklenburg County uses the national change of address (NCOA) database and mass mailings to keep its registration lists up-to-date. At the time of the 1996 election, about 30 percent of the county’s registration files contained incorrect addresses or other information that resulted in undeliverable mail. Thousands of election day corrections to their records also were discovered at the polling place. To solve this problem, the county matched all of the addresses against a file of valid post office addresses. Many of the errors found were corrected in the data, and others led to corrections by the post office in their records. The next step was a full-file match of their database against the NCOA database. Confirmation notices were sent to about 18,000 voters with out-of-county forwarding addresses. Those returned undeliverable became inactive, and those returned verifying a new out-of-county address were purged. Finally, the county mailed a postcard to every active voter on record (about 330,000 of them), verifying all the information in the registration record.
 
 
 

On-line – Information is transferred and updated by computer.
Real-time – As soon as a voter’s information is entered by a county into the system it is directly transferred to the central state database by computer.

Principle:

Every vote must count.

Recommendations:
 
 

Recommendation 4.1: States should provide a uniform method, by voting system, to allow voters to cast a provisional ballot at the polling place if their eligibility to vote is in question, thus resulting in the denial of their opportunity to cast a standard ballot. Recommendation 4.2: States should have a uniform method to judge and count provisional ballots.

Examples of Best Practices:

• Notifying voters of the rejection of a provisional ballot.
• Training election day workers on the procedures for use of provisional ballots.
• Using provisional ballot information to update voter registration data.

Overview

When a voter arrives at a polling place on election day to cast a ballot and his or her name is not found on the voter registration list, 20 states, and the District of Columbia, allow the voter to vote by casting a specially marked ballot. The most common term for this ballot is "provisional ballot;" other terms include "challenge," "emergency," "special," and "affidavit." Provisional ballots are separated from non-provisional ballots and are counted later.

Some states do not specifically provide for provisional ballots, but have other methods of allowing voters to cast a ballot if their name does not appear on the voter registration list. Like provisional ballots, these ballots, once cast, also are separated from regular ballots and counted later. Specifically:

• Six states require a voter to show identification and then sign an affidavit to obtain a ballot.

• Five states require the precinct worker, election day worker, or voter to call the main election office to receive an oral verification of registration in order to vote. If no oral verification from the county official or state election office can be obtained the voter is not allowed to vote.

• Ten states have other procedures by which to verify a voter’s registration status. All procedures involve filling out some sort of paperwork and showing identification, which must include up-to-date residence information, in order to cast a ballot.

In seven states, provisional ballots are not required because six states have same-day registration and North Dakota has no registration.

Disposition of Provisional Ballots

If a voter casts a vote by provisional ballot, few states have clear language in statute about how and when that ballot is counted and if the voter is notified as to the disposition of the ballot. However, although not directed by state law, many counties do inform voters about the status of the provisional ballot. Examples of how states approach provisional balloting are:

• California does not count a provisional ballot unless an election official can verify the voter's right to vote or by order of a state superior court.
• Connecticut counts challenged ballots only if an election is contested. If there is a contest, the board of admissions decides whether to count a challenged ballot.
• Kansas requires the board of county canvassers to determine the acceptance or rejection of each provisional ballot.
• Mississippi and Virginia require the registrar to inform voters of the status of their provisional ballots and/or their registration status.

Revitalizing Democracy in Florida: The Governor’s Select Task Force on Election Procedures, Standards and Technology recommended:

Fourteen states considered legislation on provisional ballots. At least four states passed legislation in 2001 including:

• Florida established a procedure for implementing the use of provisional ballots that permits a voter to cast one if the voter claims to be registered but the eligibility cannot be confirmed at the poll on election day.

• Maryland enacted legislation that provides for the required content of a provisional ballot, establishes procedures for voting by means of a provisional ballot, and simplifies the transfer of registration for a voter who moves to another county within the state.

Principle:

Voting should be a simple, convenient, and a user-friendly process that encourages each citizen to express his or her choices.

Recommendations:
 
 

Recommendation 5.1: Requirements for absentee voting should not be intimidating nor discourage participation. Recommendation 5.2: States should adopt no-excuse, absentee voting and early voting procedures. Recommendation 5.3: States should enact legislation that will accommodate military and overseas voters in every way possible.

Examples of Best Practices:

• Designating multiple convenient locations as voting sites for early voting.

• Adopting permanent absentee voting status.

• Extending time periods for absentee voting.

Overview

Absentee voting and early voting are increasing throughout the country. One estimate is that as many as one in four voters cast their vote before election day in 2000. It is important that states evaluate and choose methods of voting that are appropriate for their voters and culture because what works in one state may not work in another.

Advantages:

States with liberal absentee provisions, early voting or both claim voters have more flexibility and increased access, which increases participation. In addition, because of ease and accessibility, absentee and early voting contribute to voter retention. Absentee and early voting give voters more options in how, where and when to cast votes thus increasing voter satisfaction.

Disadvantages:

When liberalizing absentee voting laws, instituting early voting or doing both, it becomes more difficult for a state to predict how many absentee and early ballots to print and how many more poll workers will be needed to count ballots and staff polls. This can drive up election administration costs. Most states already have a difficult time recruiting poll workers, so increasing poll site hours of operation for the early voting period puts an additional burden on states and counties to recruit workers. Some believe that expanded use of absentee and early voting methods may increase the risk of voter fraud.

Absentee and Early Voting Statistics

• In the first year of early voting in North Carolina, 24 percent of the total ballots were cast by early voters. North Carolina’s 2000 voter turnout was 404,114 votes higher than 1992 and 502,607 votes higher than 1996.
• In California, 25 percent of all ballots cast were absentee ballots.
• In Tennessee, 36 percent of all votes cast were before election day by early voters.
• In both Iowa and Kentucky, 21 percent of all votes cast were absentee.
• In 1999, 51 percent of Washington State voters cast their ballot by mail up from 12 percent in 1980.

Twenty states have no-excuse absentee voting, which means that any registered voter for any reason can apply to receive an absentee ballot in the mail, vote, and then either mail or hand-deliver the completed ballot to the appropriate office.

Thirty states require a voter to have a reason or an excuse to vote by absentee ballot. Excuses range from:

• Being absent from the county on election day,
• Being disabled or ill,
• Being prohibited by his or her religion from voting on election day,
• Having to be at work during the hours the polls are open,
• Being away at school or living overseas, or
• Being engaged in active duty in the military.

To receive a ballot by mail, a voter must file a written application for an absentee ballot. Twenty-two states allow voters to apply for an absentee ballot year-round. Twenty-two states have a set time period in which they accept and process applications for absentee ballots. Six states do not specify in statute the time frame in which applications are accepted. Examples include:

• California: where applications are accepted year-round, but processed between the 29^th and seventh day before an election;
• Montana: where applications are accepted 75 days before the day of the election until noon on the day before the election;
• Nebraska: where applications must be requested not more than 90 days and not later than seven days before an election.

• Most states require absentee ballots be returned no later than election day or the close of the polls.

• Delaware, Louisiana and North Carolina require absentee ballots be returned the day before the election.

• Other state requirements range from requiring the absentee ballots to be postmarked the day before or the day of the election to being received no later than 10 days after election day.

Three states--California, Utah and Washington--allow voters to apply once for permanent absentee status for any reason until such time as the voter revokes such status. Six states allow voters to apply for one-year absentee status, valid for all elections held during the calendar year. At least 10 states have provisions to allow permanently disabled or ill voters to apply for permanent absentee status.

Absentee Ballot Counting

Most states begin counting absentee ballots on election day or at the close of the polls. California and Colorado begin counting absentee ballots before election day. Maryland begins counting absentee ballots the first Thursday after election day. Nebraska begins counting absentee ballots on the second day after election day.

Early Voting

Twenty-six states have some form of early voting (sometimes referred to as in-person absentee voting, onsite voting or advance voting), where voters complete the ballot in perso