-
Voter Registration Modernization
David Becker
John LindbackProject Director, Elections Initiatives
Senior Officer, Elections InitiativesPew Center on the States
Pew Center on the States
-
The Pew Charitable TrustsThe Pew Charitable Trusts is driven by the power of knowledge tosolve today’s most challenging problems. Pew applies a rigorous, analytical approach to improve public policy, inform the public and stimulate civic life. We partner with a diverse range of donors,
public and private organizations and concerned citizens who share our commitment to fact‐based solutions and goal‐driven investments to improve society.
An independent nonprofit, Pew is the sole beneficiary of seven individual charitable funds established between 1948 and 1979 by
two sons and two daughters of Sun Oil Company founder Joseph N. Pew and his wife, Mary Anderson Pew.
-
The Pew Center on the StatesPew’s Center on the States (PCS) works to advance state policies that serve the public interest. PCS conducts credible research, brings together diverse perspectives and analyzes states’
experiences to determine what works and what does not.
•Childhood health •Corrections and public safety•Early education •Economic competitiveness •Elections•Government performance
-
Pew Election Initiatives
•
Track record of bi‐partisan work with officials
•
Our process: research then recommendations
• Three priority areas:
‐Military and Overseas Voting
‐ Voting Information Project
‐ Voter Registration Modernization
-
Think back: US elections in 2008•
Massive voter registration drives, some controversial
•
In some states, voters in droves changed party affiliations
•
Huge numbers of voter registration cards submitted at deadlines
•
Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of voters claimed they were
registered but not on the rolls
•
Elections officials reported they were overwhelmed
-
The US electorate in 2008•
230 million people of voting age
•
212 million eligible (citizens, non‐felons) voters
•
133 million voters in the 2008 General Election
•
Estimated that 70‐75% of eligible voters nationwide are
registered
-
The Current State of Voter Registration:
Hundreds of millions of dollars spent each election
cycle on an antiquated paper‐based system that:
-
… Is Inaccurate
•
Large percentages of the rolls are deadwood
•
Perhaps even larger percentages of records contain inaccurate or out‐of‐date information
-
… Is Costly
•
Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent by jurisdictions alone each election cycle, to pay for paper forms, processing (often by temporary employees) and other associated costs, such as processing returned mail
•
Additional hundreds of millions of dollars are spent each cycleby interest groups, political parties and campaigns to register voters outside of the direct supervision of election officials
-
… Is Inefficient
•
Responsibility to register voters is largely placed in the hands of unregulated third party groups
•
Huge volumes of voter registrations submitted at deadlines, often overwhelming election officials
•
Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of voters claimed they were registered but not on the rolls
-
Voter Registration Modernization (VRM)
Bringing Voter Registration into the 21st
Century
-
The need for modernization:
1. Accuracy
2. Cost
3. Efficiency
-
Accuracy
•
It is estimated that at least 15% of the records in the voter rolls are no longer valid, being either duplicates or outdated (people moving, new voters, new citizens, deaths)
•
Preliminary research appears to show that approximately 1 out of 5 records of valid voters contain at least one inaccurate piece of
data (same as Canada, where 20% of list becomes outdated annually)
•
The system is rife with data entry errors, leading to problems at the polls and returned mail
-
Cost •
Approximately one‐third of local election office budgets across the country are devoted to building and maintaining voter registration lists
•Forsyth County, Georgia (102,424 voters) spent half its $1.4 million budget on the registration process in 2008•Franklin County, Ohio (848,013 voters) spent $1 million on personnel costs for voter registration in 2008•Los Angeles County, California (4,341,135 voters) spent over $13
million on voter registration costs in 2008
•
Paper‐based system requires the printing of millions of paper forms
•
Must be processed by hand, often by dozens of temporary employees
•
Inaccurate information leads to returned mail and processing costs
•These costs are part of overall 30‐35% increase in budgets since HAVA
-
Cost The Oregon experience…
•
Pew is examining what it costs Oregon taxpayers to maintain a list of approximately 2 million voters.
•
Preliminary research indicates it costs between $2 and $3 per voter to maintain a voter registration list in Oregon in a peak year. The state built its
new system for approximately $10 million.
•
Costs are incurred at both the local government level (counties) and at the state level.
•
The taxpayers are footing the bill at all three levels of taxation –
federal, state and local.
-
Efficiency•
Various studies estimate that only about 70‐75% of eligible voters are captured by the current system
•
Heavy reliance on political campaigns and third‐party voter drives
•
9 million citizens did not register in 2008 because of residency rules or registration deadlines
•
3 million voters experienced a problem with voter registration in 2008 general election
•
2.2 million votes were lost due to voter registration problems in the 2008 general election
-
•
Crush of registrations received near/at the deadline that overwhelm election officials.
• Military voters registering from afar–
Military voters were about twice as likely to say they couldn’t
vote because of registration problems
•
National Voter Registration Act (Motor Voter) compliance–
Paper‐ and mail‐based system–
Government‐run registration, but unevenly implemented
Efficiency
-
Voter Registration Modernizationmeans
Keeping lists current
Reducing costs, such ballots returned by USPS
Minimizing the need for third‐party drives
Helping voters not on polling place lists
-
Voter Registration Modernizationew is researching whether it is possible, using current technology, to implement a voter registration system that will be more accurate, more cost effective, and more efficient, by:
•utomatically putting eligible voters onto the voter rolls using data in existing governmental databases;
•utomatically updating
existing voter records using new data captured in other databases; and
•roviding for a “failsafe”
that will allow eligible voters who slip through th
k h i t d t t t th t th t
-
Improving Accuracy
•
Reduction or near‐elimination of duplicate registrations
•
Instant updating of records with most recent information, such as tax records, motor vehicle records, other government data
• Substantial reduction in returned mail
•
Minimize registration problems at the polls
-
More Cost Effective
•
Automated system means fewer staff and resources needed to create voter records, once infrastructure in place
•
Significantly reduced paper or printing costs
•
List maintenance costs vastly reduced, as updates occur automatically
-
Cost The Canadian experience…
•
In 1996, Elections Canada (its federal elections agency) built its National Register of Electors for $13.3 million CAD for 20 million voters. Costs included the price of building computer systems, acquisition of computer hardware and software and similar costs from provincial data sources.
•
Today, the permanent register cost approximately $5 million per
year to maintain.
•
The permanent register is estimated to have saved Canadian taxpayers approximately $130 million over the six elections following its introduction.
-
Increased Efficiency
•
Much higher percentage of eligible voters on the rolls•
No more reliance on outside registration groups•
No more lost votes•
No more rush at the registration deadline•
More accurate information on location of and contact information
for
military voters, streamlining UOCAVA voting•
The NVRA becomes obsolete
-
Challenges to modernization: •
echnical and data issues
•
itizenship data
•
ignature requirement
•
rivacy concerns
-
The push for modernization •
Congress is acting –
US Senate Committee on Rules & Administration is expected to introduce a major bill addressing VRM this year
•
Committee on House Administration has considered several bills to modernize registration
•
Many states have considered or adopted legislation to modernize their voter registration systems
-
Pew is committed to addressing the challenges, technical and otherwise, in modernizing our system, by promoting innovation in the states
•
Bringing together technical experts and state election officials to address challenges
• Toronto meeting
• Producing research
• Pilots in the states
-
David BeckerProject Director, Election Initiatives
The Pew Center on the StatesWashington, DC(202) 552‐2136
[email protected]
