« Environment - Stories today | Main | Indiana Law - Three constitutional amendments on the Indiana ballot »

Monday, October 11, 2004

Law - Provisional voting may cause confusion

"Backup voting system may be source of glitches and lawsuits" is the headline to this AP story published today in the Munster Times. A quote:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Call it the law of unintended consequences.

A new national backup system meant to ensure that millions of eligible voters are not mistakenly turned away from the polls this year, as happened in 2000, could wind up causing Election Day problems as infamous as Florida's hanging chads.

Congress required conditional, or provisional, voting as part of election fixes passed in 2002. For the first time, all states must offer a backup ballot to any voter whose name does not appear on the rolls when the voter comes to the polling place on Nov. 2. If the voter is later found eligible, the vote counts.

Congress did not specify exactly how the provisional votes will be evaluated.

"States struggle with provisional balloting" Will they be the 'hanging chads' of Decision 2004?" is the heading to this story on the MSNBC website.

And the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported here last Wednesday:

A voting-rights group filed a lawsuit Tuesday challenging Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell's rules on provisional voting - the second such legal challenge over the controversial issue.

The suit, filed by the Ohio Voter Protection Project, says Blackwell will require some first-time voters to show identification before receiving a provisional ballot on Election Day - a violation of the federal Help America Vote Act, or HAVA. * * *

Provisional ballots are special ballots for voters who believe they are registered, though their names do not appear on the voter rolls on Election Day. The ballots are set aside so election officials can later determine if the voters are eligible.

Blackwell, citing state law, has told local election officials that these ballots must be given only to voters who appear at the correct precinct. But the lawsuits say the state's rules should have been changed after Congress passed HAVA in 2002, a law that encouraged the use of provisional ballots so legitimate voters aren't turned away.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on October 11, 2004 07:17 AM
Posted to General Law Related