[an error occurred while processing this directive]

REVISITING THE U.S. VOTING SYSTEM: A RESEARCH INVENTORY

November 27-28, 2006

Convened by the American Association for the Advancement of Science

Elizabeth Westfall

RESEARCH ON THE EFFECTS OF RESTRICTIVE RULES RELATED TO VOTER REGISTRATION AND VOTING, RESOURCES AT THE POLLS ON ELECTION DAY, AND THE IMPACT OF VOTER SUPPRESSION AND INTIMIDATION

In a recent Supreme Court decision, Purcell v. Gonzalez, concerning an Arizona law requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote and photo identification at the polls, Justice Stevens identified two factual issues for resolution:

The scope of the disenfranchisement that the novel identification requirements will produce, and the prevalence and character of the fraudulent practices that allegedly justify those requirements.

Although the Court’s opinion has little value as legal precedent, Justice Stevens’s analysis identifies two of the most important issues that face voting rights advocates. Unless we are able to persuade courts and policy makers based purely on the law—which is unlikely-- we will need empirical evidence to document (1) the effects of restrictive voter registration requirements and requirements at the polls on prospective registrants’ and voters’ access to the franchise; and (2) whether the specter of fraud often used to justify these restrictions has any factual support. Academic research on these topics would assist advocates in persuading policy makers to eliminate barriers to voter registration and voting and if necessary, in challenging such barriers through litigation.

Advancement Project hopes to gather data to document the impact, particularly the demographic impact by race and ethnicity, of barriers to voter registration and at the polls, as well as the extent to which rules that expand access to the franchise result in an increase in fraudulent voter registration or voting. Advancement Project also hopes to gather data related to the use of provisional ballots, distribution of resources at the polls, and the impact of efforts to depress the vote. Here are some questions that we think it important to ask:

Of those voter registration applications rejected or deemed incomplete, why were they rejected or deemed incomplete?
What are the effects of new registration requirements -- e.g. identification number required by the Help America Vote Act, documentary proof of citizenship (AZ) -- on voter registration, particularly on historically disenfranchised communities?
What is the impact of requirements that voters show identification at the polls on Election Day? Do ID requirements disproportionately impact historically disenfranchised communities? Do such restrictions decrease the incidence of fraud or have any other measurable salutary effects?
What is the incidence of fraud in voter registration and at the polls? How do we measure it? What types of fraud affect the electoral process?
Of those provisional ballots that are not counted, why were they not counted and should they have been counted (e.g. should the voter have been on the voter rolls)? What are the demographic characteristics of voters who cast provisional ballots and voters whose provisional ballots are not counted?
How should election officials allocate resources at the polls, such as voting machines and poll workers, to reduce long lines for voters?
What is the impact of efforts to suppress the vote, or misleading or inaccurate notices from election officials, on voter participation?

Advancement Project

Advancement Project is a non-profit advocacy organization in Washington, DC that works in partnership with Project Vote, other voter registration groups, and local voter protection coalitions to eliminate legal and structural barriers to voting for potential voters in minority and low-income communities.

With its legal and communications expertise, Advancement Project supports and leverages local capacity to improve election administration and expand voter enfranchisement. By monitoring new registration activity and facilitating effective communication between local coalitions and election administrators, we work to identify and prevent potential Election Day problems. We are building a framework for effective voter protection efforts in targeted states and counties and plan to replicate those efforts in other communities in upcoming election cycles.