Tag Archives: Election Administration

Iowa Gov. signs election integrity law that includes voter ID

A new election integrity law that includes a voter ID requirement and shortens the early voting period from 40 to 29 days was signed into law by Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad on Friday.

The bill, HF 516, requires voters to show identification at the polls beginning in 2019. If an individual cannot afford an identification card or does not have one, a card will be provided free of charge.


The law provides additional submission guidelines for third-party voter registration organizers and establishes requirements for post-election audits and referring illegal votes to local law enforcement. The law also adjusts the absentee voting period to 29 days before an election and creates an electronic poll book to identify felon status.

Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate said the bill isn’t just about preventing voter fraud, but also modernizing the state’s election processes and managing voter information.


No, we don’t need national voting standards

The last thing we need is Washington, D.C. issuing more standards.

Election administration is, at its core, a customer service function best performed locally. The genius of the Constitution was the decentralization of power and decision making. When it comes to something so important as states holding elections, that Constitutional design shouldn’t be scrapped so the federal government dictates more rules to the states.

“Merrill: It is time to strengthen Connecticut’s election system”

Why can 49 other states have one professional in charge of elections locally but not Connecticut?


Secretary of State Denise Merrill makes the case for professional election administrators:


As municipal employees, these registrars could be required to be certified and undergo yearly training, and face real consequences for not following state election laws — like losing their jobs…


Twice in the last four years Connecticut has been nationally ridiculed for serious election administration failures that disenfranchised voters in Bridgeport and Hartford.  Yet the registrars whose failures led to that disenfranchisement, including one who is under criminal investigation for voter fraud, still sit in positions of authority running elections in those two communities. Under our current structure, any town could be the next Hartford or Bridgeport. 


Update: As Hartford’s elected registrars face removal, the state considers a legislative change

The Hartford Courant has the latest:


A proposal by the city council to begin the process of removing Hartford’s three registrars has raised questions over what would happen to the office.


State law says the deputy registrars would take over. But the city charter says the council has the power to fill vacancies that arise in elected positions.  Council President Shawn Wooden said he is hoping a bill that would allow the city to appoint a single, nonpartisan registrar will solve the issue… Wooden said the change would create “a clear line of accountability” in the office.

St. Louis County election commission unanimously votes out board director Rita Days

Another poorly-performing election official is held accountable:


A Democrat, Days has overseen county elections since her appointment by the commission in 2011.  Her annual salary was $118,539. 


The commission consists of four gubernatorial appointments, two Republicans and two Democrats.  The party holding the governor’s office chooses the paid election director.   


Days’ tenure was marred by a shortage of paper ballots in the November, 2014 general election, faulty electronic balloting equipment and lengthy delays in reporting election results.


Days also landed in the center of a discredited national story last October when she incorrectly told USA Today and Huffington Post that 3,287 Ferguson residents had registered to vote in the months following the summer unrest in their community. The actual number of registrations, which was closer to a figure she’d provided earlier to the Post-Dispatch, was 128.

Hartford election officials facing removal for “multiple, serious errors” and “numerous failures”

“In short, multiple, serious errors plagued the administration of the 2014 General Election in Hartford.  These errors appear to have resulted in the disenfranchisement of Hartford voters and, even several months later, a lack of an accurate vote count.”


The “numerous failures” by Hartford’s Registrars of Voters office, documented in a January 16 report, include “a failure to file final registry books with the town and city clerk by Oct. 29; a failure to prepare and deliver final registry books to moderators by 8 p.m. the night before the election, as required by state law;” and the fact that “no Hartford election official can explain what happened to approximately 70 absentee ballots reported as having been received.”


Hartford city council members said today they will seek to remove the city’s three registrars and may recommend additional reforms.  Connecticut’s State Elections Enforcement Commission has launched a separate investigation.