Ballot reform measure could delay final election result

By THOMAS HARGROVE and MICHAEL COLLINS
Scripps Howard News Service
October 25, 2004

- If voters wake up after Election Day again wondering who won the presidential race, the reason could be a new reform measure intended to protect their rights.

Congress, under the Help America Vote Act of 2002 inspired by Florida's troubled presidential election, is requiring all states to allow voters to cast a provisional ballot even if their name does not appear on the rolls of registered voters.

Many critical details - including how long officials may take in counting provisional ballots and whether voters can cast such ballots if they show up at the wrong precinct next week - are left to the states to decide.

Recent federal appeals court rulings have struck down attempts by Democrats in Ohio and Michigan to force election officials to accept provisional ballots even if voters are in the wrong precinct. Twenty-seven states and the District of Columbia permit voters to cast provisional ballots only if they show up at their correct precinct on Election Day; 17 other states permit provisional voting across a much broader jurisdiction.

If the presidential race remains tight, the public may have to wait days or even weeks while officials sort through thousands of provisional ballots to determine if they should be counted.

"It will be frustrating. People will be upset, no question about it," said Amy Naccarato, Utah's director of elections. "People will think we are keeping this information secret, keeping it under wraps. I can't even imagine what will happen if we have a major race hanging in the balance over this."

Utah's provisional ballot, first used in 2002, already has delayed the outcome in some important state races. Officials took two weeks to determine that 8,355 of the 10,706 provisional ballots cast two years ago were valid, ending uncertainty over the election of Democratic Rep. Jim Matheson.

"Provisional ballots really are the wild card in this upcoming election," said Dan Seligson, editor of Electionline.org, a non-partisan election reform group. "It really comes down to how healthy are the voter registration lists."

There is widespread agreement that the official registration lists are a mess in most states. During the 2000 presidential election, 261 counties had registered more voters than the actual adult population, according to a study of state records by Scripps Howard News Service. Hundreds of thousands of people who had died or moved to new towns were still on the voting rolls then.

More worrisome, perhaps, are the unknown number of people who are not on the official rolls because of errors by election officials. A survey of 800 registered voters conducted this summer by Scripps Howard and Ohio University found 3 percent said they had been denied ballots at least once because of registration problems.

Congress mandated provisional ballots after receiving testimony that voters in Florida were improperly removed from the registration lists four years ago and denied ballots when they showed up at the polls.

"The provisional vote is going to make it much more complicated this year," Seligson said. "If the number of provisional ballots exceeds the margin of victory in any state, then that's when large numbers of ballots are going to be challenged."

The guidelines over how to handle provisional ballots vary enormously, according to interviews with top election officials in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

Vermont, for example, predicts it will have few provisional ballots and expects to count them all election night. California, on the other hand, allows up to 28 days for counting these ballots, although state officials emphasize it may not take that long.

About two-thirds of the states had some form of provisional voting in effect two years ago, so they won't be caught completely off balance by the new requirements.

"There will be a number of provisional ballots. People, for whatever reason, don't get on the rolls," said Joe Kanefield, elections director in the battleground state of Arizona. His state mandates provisional ballots be counted within 20 days of the election.

Election officials in North Carolina have seven days to determine if provisional ballots should be counted.

"Our urban counties have been hard pressed sometimes to meet that deadline," said Gary Bartlett, director of the North Carolina Board of Elections. "Usually, provisional ballots are less than 1 percent of the votes cast. But 70 percent of them end up being counted."

Bartlett, like most officials, said he is confident his state will be able to process provisional votes quickly. But many thousands of new voter registrations prompted by the tight presidential race make room for doubt. "We've never seen the level of activity that we have seen recently," Bartlett said.

The task of reviewing and counting provisional ballots goes to local officials who mostly say they are confident next week's election will go smoothly.

"We had about 200 provisional ballots cast in the March primary. We have nine days to complete verification, but it took us four or five days in March," said Baltimore City Election Director Barbara Jackson. "We are guessing we'll have 500 or so provisional ballots in November. It could be more because people are becoming more aware of the provisional ballot."

Bob Balink, El Paso County clerk in Colorado, said his office reviewed 340 provisional ballots during the primary and may have up to 2,000 such votes next week.

"The provisional ballot has been working extremely well for us. Who can deny the principle that no one who should be allowed to vote should be prevented?" Balink said. "Unfortunately, mistakes are made with registration."

The most common reason voters were denied ballots in the past, according to the Scripps Howard poll, is because precinct lines were redrawn and voters were not aware that polling places had changed.