Mr. Robert Pastor, in "
America Observed", (The American Prospect Online, Dec 20, 2004) raises some valid points about election administration in the United States. I agree with Mr. Pastor that there are areas of election administration and electoral policy that need improvement. Not only are there better ways to administer elections, there are policy decisions to be made as to what type of system best allows a voter to effectively cast a ballot in our representative government. However, Mr. Pastor paints a picture of American election administration using very broad strokes with a small array of bold colors. He does not present the nuances found in reality.
Most certainly his article is geared toward the conduct of federal elections, and thus it is tempting to speak of a more uniform system for those elections. However, he seems to dismiss without comment the federalist system by which the founders embedded in the Constitution the ability of states to regulate time, place and manner of their elections. This method of configuring election administration, where the states are the locus of authority, cannot be represented in broad strokes and limited colors, but rather should be presented in fine detail with gradations of color.
For example, Mr. Pastor lays out three models for administering elections and states that, in America, the incumbent government places itself in charge of elections, to the exclusion of the other models. I am not sure his conclusion regarding America is correct, in the case of presidential elections, or even useful, in the case of state and local elections.
Regarding presidential elections, the incumbent government, namely the federal government, plays no particular role in the administration of the general election for that office. The federal government does have supervisory and regulatory roles with regard to campaign finance through the Federal Election Commission. Further, the Election Assistance Commission and the Department of Justice have some limited duties under the Help America Vote Act, the National Voter Registration Act and the Voting Rights Act. However, these duties are not directly targeted at how the electoral system is structured and administered.
At the state and local level, one can argue that the incumbent government has put itself in charge through state election codes and administrative regulations. But given that election administration is a function of government, and in no country do we see a non-governmental body conduct elections for governmental offices, this conceptualization seems more obvious than useful.
Further, by making his sweeping statement about who is in charge of elections, Mr. Pastor ignores the fact that election administration in America does not fall neatly into any category. In some states, the chief election official is a secretary of state. In others, state-level administration is the responsiblity of a board of elections. At the local level there is also various organization schemes. In Alabama, three elected officials, whose responsibilities are not primarily related to elections, oversee the county-level election processes. However, in Florida, counties have an elected supervisor of election. In California, counties have an appointed registrar of voters. And in North Carolina, counties have a board of elections. You will find variations and similarities in other states.
Of course, I am helping to make Mr. Pastor's case for him -- that there is a lack of uniformity nationwide in the configuration of electoral processes and election administration. However, he then contends that this lack of uniformity leads to troubling problems in the electoral system, which in turn causes voters to lose confidence in the system. I am not so convinced of his conclusion.
As an election administrator of 13 years, it is my experience that the problems that surface in election administration are not necessarily the product of differing organizational schemes. Rather, they tend to result from a mixture of related factors: funding and training for both election officials and voters.
Election administration tends to be underfunded at the state and local level. (Mr. Pastor has conceded the federal government does not sufficiently provide sufficient funds for American elections, despite particular mandates in the various federal laws listed above.) While states and counties will expend the funds necessary to hold an election, many states and counties do not have the dollars to spend, or perhaps the will to spend them, to make continuing improvements in election administration. For example, states and counties do not have the money to purchase new voting equipment everytime there is an advance in technology. Similarly, most states and counties do not have the funds to conduct extensive training and education programs for voters as well as election officials.
While some states and counties proactively send sample ballot materials to all registered voters with instructions on voting, most states just simply do not have the money to provide this type of information directly to the voter. They instead rely on instructional materials at the polling place, which may or may not be reviewed, or even comprehended, by voters.
States and counties make efforts to ensure county election officials and poll workers are trained to perform their jobs on election day. However, with limited resources, it's a daunting task to ensure that all election officials are 100% up to speed on all applicable state and federal laws. While the permanent election staff in each state and county tend to be well-versed due to years of experience combined with regular training, there is only limited time and money to train a diverse population of poll workers. And given the differing levels of competency among those poll workers, counties can be quite challenged when trying to educate them on all laws and procedures and the options voters have at their disposal to exercise their voting rights.
Mr. Pastor seems to beg the question on the availibity of training for poll workers when he states that working the polls should be a civic responsibility like jury duty, implying the poll worker force should be drafted rather than comprised of volunteers. While selecting poll workers in way similar to jurors would resolve some problems related to the staffing polls (many jurisdictions are in crisis as we speak for lack of volunteer poll workers), such a system would exacerbate the training problem by not benefiting from the experience that seasoned poll workers offer to election day operations. If counties are not able to rely on experienced poll workers, then more funding must be guaranteed for effective training of polling officials.
Mr. Pastor is correct that some areas of election administration and electoral policy need further review and perfecting. I agree, admitting that better funding and training, as useful as they are, will not solve all problems. Our efforts, though, should be focused on the basics before we move toward grand proposals for reconfiguring American institutions such as the Electoral College or our system of representation (although reforms in those areas may be warrented or desirable).
First, we should ensure that the system is not skewed or manipulated through barriers to registration and voting that unfairly limit people's ability to participate in selecting their representatives in government.
Second, we should ensure that election officials, including poll workers, are well-trained on the laws and procedures applicable in their jurisdictions. Election officials must be properly equipped to fulfill their dual roles as protectors of the integrity of the voting system and protectors of individual voting rights.
Third, we should ensure election officials have sufficient resources for voter education and outreach. Potential voters need to be prepared not only to participate on election day but also to do the things throughout the year to ensure their eligibility, such as registering to vote or updating their voter registration information when they move.
Fourth, sufficient funding should be provided so that election officials are able to staff and equip the machinery that makes voting available on election day, not to mention all the tasks performed throughout the year to prepare for or to finalize an election.
We should keep in mind that the electoral system is, at its simplest, a way to let people register choices and have those choices counted in a reliable way. Everything we do in election administration should be geared toward that goal.
