Provisional Voting Into Current Election Procedures example essay topic

Part I: Current Social Issues One social issue in my community that concerns me is that of provisional voting, which is proving to be an issue in many communities. The requirement that all states make provisional voting available was passed down by congress. Unfortunately, no guidelines were included with this requirement, and therefore the decisions on which provisional votes are counted and which ones are not differ not only from state to state but from county to county. As a result, provisional voting is beneficial to some and not to others. The main agencies involved with this issue would be the local election offices as well as the secretaries of state. Part II: Relevant Agencies Quite obviously, the main agency that would be involved with the issue of provisional voting is the local elections office.

This agency devotes great energies to make sure that every member of the public is given the opportunity to cast their votes. Because this is the agency that determines whether or not each provisional vote will count, these are the individuals that play the most major roll. The Secretary of State's office is also like to be involved in provisional voting. Each state is expected to be responsible for drawing up guidelines for the procedures to be followed for provisional voting. At present time, the guidelines are unclear, if existent at all, but at some point must be addressed by the Secretary of State. The local elections office and the Secretary of State represent the government sector.

The final organization that I expect to see involved with provisional voting are the poll workers. These are the individuals that volunteer their time on election day to officiate the polls where votes are cast. Since provisional voting is still quite new, the procedures can be somewhat confusing, and it is these people that must make sense of it. I would classify them as being part of the philanthropic sector. Part : Final Paper Topic The issue I have chosen to further develop for my final paper is that of provisional voting and the guidelines by which the decisions are made as to which provisional votes will be counted and which will not. I have chosen to pursue this particular issue due to the fact that I work as an Elections Coordinator and I have recently experienced my first election from behind the scenes, so to speak.

Provisional voting is a serious issue, required by Congress, but handed down with little or no guidelines. Because Congress handed down the requirement of provisional voting as part of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), with no guidelines on how it should be decided which votes to count, it has been left up to each individual county to develop these guidelines. As a result, the primary agency involved is the local election office. In a small county, it only includes four individuals in the department.

However, we have looked to other counties along the way for input on how they determine which votes to count. The problems that have arisen with the lack of guidelines begin with what is looked upon as "false insurance policy" in provisional voting. Provisional voters with the same circumstances for voting provisionally are not counted equally from county to county, much less state to state. Additionally, county employees are forced to come up with their own guidelines and explanations as to why they differ from other counties, and why a particular voter's vote may not count. As an employee, I find myself uncomfortable with not being able to give inquiring voters a direct answer. After an election, county elections employee must carefully review each and every provisional vote manually and determine whether or not each vote will count.

Some states have just three days to complete this, others up to 28 days. In conclusion, it appears to me that the primary agency involved with this issue is the local elections office. However, if further problems arise, Secretaries of State and Congress could easily become involved as well. Part IV: Barriers, Opportunities, Risks and Benefits For further information on provisional voting, I spoke to several elections officials ranging from elections clerks, to registrar of voters, to state level elections officials.

Since I am an elections coordinator, I must also take into consideration my own thoughts on the topic of provisional voting. Not surprisingly, many of the answers I got from all of the elections officials were quite similar. The main barrier to the success of provisional voting is the lack of guidance on how to determine which provisional votes are ultimately counted. Provisional voting has proven to be very difficult for voters and poll workers to understand. However, between better education and voter outreach in California, provisional voting will become less confusing. The decision rests on the election office as they validate or reject each vote based on election law.

The risk of this issue runs hand in hand with the barrier as there is a risk of lack of uniformity among county procedures because the Secretary of State has not yet published guidelines for counties to follow in accepting or rejecting a ballot. The opportunities and benefits of provisional voting express in my interviews are also closely related. Provisional voting allows an opportunity for a voter to cast a ballot even though it appears they may not qualify. This enables poll workers to not have to turn any voter away at the polls. Provisional voting also gives the voter the right to contact the elections office to find out if his or her vote was counted and if not, the reason for rejection. Provisional voting id being allowed by more and more states and can benefit the voter only of an adopted set of uniform guidelines is in place to insure that each provisional vote is judged under the same criteria.

Part V: Successful Integration of Provisional Voting Brief History & Understanding of Provisional Voting In 2002, the Help America Vote Act, was passed and allows provisional voting, however, many voters nationwide still question the validity of votes cast in this method (Seligson, 2004). Following the hardships and inconsistencies of the general election of 2000, Congress decided it was necessary to sanction funds specifically for improving and upgrading voting machines and increasing disabled voters accessibility to polling places, among other things (NP Action, 2004). These funds are known as HAVA, Help America Vote Act. All states must implement the provisions of HAVA in a swift and timely manner. Among the specifications of HAVA is the availability of provisional voting.

With the implementation of HAVA, all states must "meet standards for provisional ballots" (NP Action, 2004). Provisional voting is part of an attempt to give all Americans the chance to cast their votes on Election Day. According to HAVA, all states should have "implemented a provisional ballot program to ensure no one is turned away at the polls", (NP Action, 2004) by February, 2004. At the time the article Provisions of the Help America Vote Act was published, "forty states have met the provisional ballot requirements, six states do not need to meet the requirement because they have Election Day registration, and two states have legislation pending (NP Action, 2004). Provisional voting allows voters to cast a provisional ballot when their situation meets certain criteria. Provisional votes are later evaluated by elections officials to decide if the registrant is indeed eligible to vote and whether or not their provisional ballot will be counted.

Individuals who arrive at the polls to vote with the understanding that they are registered and eligible to vote, yet do not appear on the voter's roster are permitted a provisional vote. If the voter does appear on the roster, but does not have the proper form of identification for their first time voting in an election district, they are also given the opportunity to vote provisionally. Individuals are also allowed a provisional vote if an elections official claims that he or she is not an eligible voter (PA Home, 2004). Provisional voting requires that the voter sign an affidavit that appears on the provisional voting envelope and complete a provisional ballot, which they must seal into the envelope. Provisional ballots are then submitted to the polling location worker and the voter receives provisional voter receipt. Using the number found on that receipt, the voter can later contact the elections office to determine whether or not his or her vote was counted, and if it was not, the reason for that decision.

A major flaw in the implementation of provisional voting is the state and nation wide inconsistency in determining which provisional votes are counted and which are rejected. Provisional Ballots Still an Unsettled Issue presents several scenarios regarding this inconsistency. In Seattle, a voter arrives at the polling place to find that he is not on the voter roster. Because he believes that he is an eligible voter, he votes provisionally. Later, it is discovered that he was not on the roster because he was at the incorrect voting location.

His ballot is counted, excluding local races (Seligson, 2004). Another voter, in Tallahassee is not found on the voter roster as she has not been notified that her polling place has been moved. She too votes provisionally, but her vote is later rejected because she voted at the incorrect polling place (Seligson, 2004). "Technically, both voters could be considered the beneficiaries of the federal law passed in 2002 that ensures no qualified voter is turned away from voting, but it seems that one voter appeared to have benefited more than the other (Seligson, 2004). An informal survey conducted by the National Association of Secretaries of State discovered that "nearly half of the states questioned will count provisional ballots cast in the correct jurisdiction, while the others will count only ballots where the voter is at the correct polling place" (Seligson, 2004).

According to the same survey, Florida, Missouri and Michigan require voters to be in the correct polling place in order to cast a provisional vote, while Pennsylvania, Ohio and Arkansas allow any voter to cast a provisional vote as long as he or she is in the right jurisdiction. Georgia has an entirely different Election Day policy regarding provisional votes. If a voter arrives at a polling place to find that they are not on the voter roster, the elections office is contacted at that time to determine if the voter is at the correct location. If poll workers are unable to contact the elections office, the voter is allowed to cast a provisional vote at the location the have gone to. If the elections office is contacted, the voter is sent to their correct polling location to cast their vote (Seligson, 2004). As with any new implementations to Federal Law, many issues have been raised with the requirement of provisional voting.

According to the article Provisional Ballots Still an Unsettled Issue, "a recent survey by the National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) reveals the mandate for provisional voting is being handled differently around the country". The fact that these differences are occurring could effect whether or not all votes are counted correctly. Another aspect touched on in this article is the fact that because many states and counties using implementing provisional voting for the first time, it could result in "confused voters, poll workers, vote counters, or all three". While the intent of provisional voting is to further allow all voters to cast their votes, it appears that not everyone is in support of such a law. In an article entitled Election Commission Wants to Allow Ineligibles the Vote, provisional voting is described as allowing someone to vote even though he or she does not appear on the voter roster at a polling place. His or her eligibility is determined later.

"In a close election, provisional ballots could exceed the margin of victory. The winner would depend on how many of the maybe votes were counted. There would follow weeks of uncertainty, litigation and other ugliness. It's a recipe for mini-Floridas all over the country" (Feder, 2001).

Provisional ballots, intended to solve some of the problems resulting from the 2000 election, are viewed by some election law specialists as being "more trouble than they are worth" (Gearan, 2004). In response to the wide spread confusion as to how to determine which provisional votes will count and which will not, Edward B. Foley, director of the election law center at Ohio State University's law school, stated that he felt provisional voting was becoming "a false insurance policy" (Gearan, 2004). Successful Provisional Voting As the coordinator of a project to successfully integrate provisional voting into current election procedures, I would work closely with representatives from county elections offices, the Secretary of State offices, and election day poll workers. As I have covered, the main barrier to the success of provisional voting is the absence of a clear understanding by all agencies of the guidelines. The first step to overcoming this barrier would be to set up a clear set of policies to be followed statewide. Since the Secretary of State is the agency responsible for developing such guidelines, this is where their role in the issue would come into play.

Currently, as county agencies determine which votes to count and which to validate, they have only their office wide thoughts to rely on. I would work with the Secretary of State to develop a solid set of policies to follow. The policy would have to address what criteria would constitute a valid provisional vote. These criteria would include individuals who had recently moved to a certain county, after the county's deadline to register to vote for the upcoming election.

In addition, mistakes made by the county elections office which eliminated a qualified voter from the voter roles would also give reason for a valid provisional vote. Other valid reasons would include major health issues preventing a voter from getting registered and military related issues. Communication between the Secretary of State and the county elections offices will be essential to ensure a mutual understanding of the guidelines. The elections officials at the state level will have to all be educated on these guidelines so that when the county runs into questions with which they approach the state, they will find precise answers to their confusion.

The County elections office is the second agency I would be involved with. Once a standard set of guidelines is in place, it is imperative that these individuals be educated and well-informed of them. This would assist in two areas. Knowledge of the guidelines would allow county elections officials to make educated decisions on which provisional votes to validate and which to reject. Once the guidelines were set, trainings for county elections workers would need to be provided by the Secretary of State to ensure that they all have a clear understanding of the correct procedures to follow for provisional voting. These trainings would ensure that knowledge of these guidelines would also provide these workers with accurate information that they could in turn provide to the public.

As an elections worker, I am well aware that currently, the public's questions on provisional voting procedures are difficult to answer as the information we are provided with is unclear. It is not easy to convince the public that provisional voting is an opportunity for voters to cast a ballot even when it appears they are not qualified when the information we have to give is not solid. Poll workers play an important role in provisional voting because they are the individuals that primarily deal with the voters. Currently, each county elections office provides trainings for the individuals before each election to make sure they know the procedures of election day, as well as emergency procedures. Provisional voting guidelines would become an essential part of these trainings. Once the poll workers had a clear understanding of provisional voting, they would also be more able to provide accurate information to potential provisional voters.

Currently, poll workers have almost no knowledge of provisional voting. As a result, if questions are posed to them by voters at the polls regarding provisional voting, poll workers are forced to refer voters to the elections office. The seemingly "run around" procedure can be quite discouraging to potential voters, leaving them with the feeling that their right to vote has been somehow violated.