Issue 63 | October 2015

can•vass (n.)

Compilation of election

returns and validation of

the outcome that forms

the basis of the official

results by a political

subdivision.

—U.S. Election Assistance Commission: Glossary of Key Election Terminology

TO SUBSCRIBE to The Canvass, please

email a request to TheCanvass@ncsl.org

Inside this Issue

The Facts on 10 Common Election

Misconceptions

1

Bookmark This 3

One Big Number 3

HAVA Funds 4

From the Chair 5

The Election Admin-istrator’s Perspective

5

Worth Noting 6

From NCSL’s Elections Team

6

The Facts on 10 Common Election Misconceptions It’s October which means crisp fall air, pumpkins everywhere

and all manner of spooky and macabre decorations are dotting

offices and front porches for Halloween. In keeping with the

season, it’s a good time to look at the myths, urban legends,

and scary stories that people think of when it comes to elections.

Below are a few of the misconceptions about elections that have

come up over the years.

Dead people vote When talk turns to election fraud, the idea that dead people vote

is sure to come up. Indeed, dead people’s votes have been

counted, but specters are not showing up at the polls. Instead,

it sometimes happens that a voter votes early or by absentee

ballot, and unfortunately passes away before Election Day. In most states those votes are still counted. The

reasoning is that the voter was eligible at the time of completing the ballot. Besides, it can be virtually im-

possible from a practical point of view to separate out a ballot from someone who died before Election Day

from the other ballots received. In April and May of this year, Maryland passed two bills (S 97 and H 884)

clarifying that votes properly cast by someone who then passes away shall be counted.

But on the issue of election fraud there’s no escaping the fact that people sometimes vote using the identi-

ties of the deceased. “In Arkansas we’ve had dead people vote,” says Senator Bryan King (R-Arkansas), a

former election commissioner. “Voter fraud is not widespread and it is sensationalized when it happens, but

it happened in certain places for a long time.”

You can’t vote twice When it comes to state and federal elections voting in two different places is fraud, unwitting or otherwise.

An interesting case to watch is developing in Kansas where a man has been voting in both Colorado and

Kansas for years and is now being investigated by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach.

But certain states allow municipalities to decide whether non-resident property owners can vote in local

elections, most often when a tax issue is on the ballot.

Your voter registration is automatically updated when you move It can’t be said enough—your voter registration does not automatically update when you move. Keeping up

with a mobile population is one of the biggest challenges election officials are facing today. According to

The Pew Charitable Trusts, one in eight voter registrations is inaccurate. Online voter registration, the Elec-

tronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) and the Interstate Crosscheck System have all helped states

maintain accurate voter rolls as voters routinely move within a state or cross state lines without canceling

their voter registration. “Sticky” voter registration in which registration stays with a voter even if they move

jurisdictions within a state may be an option for states going forward. Massachusetts S 374 would establish

“sticky” registration for voters in the Bay State.

(cont. on page 2)

Page 2

NCSL: The Canvass October 2015

(Election Misconceptions, cont. from page 1)

counted. The voter votes a provisional ballot on Election Day

but has to take some additional action to actually have the vote

count. This varies from state to state depending on how long

someone has to “cure” their provisional ballot.

As for absentee ballots that don’t arrive until after Election Day,

whether they are counted and have a direct impact on a race

depends on state law. Does statute say ballots must be re-

ceived by Election Day, or postmarked by Election Day?

Alaska, Illinois, Maryland, North Carolina, Washington and West

Virginia all accept ballots that arrive after Election Day provided

they are postmarked on or before then. The deadlines are often

different for overseas and military voters who can return ballots

often days after the election.

Ballots are thrown away Ballots are not thrown away on whim. In many states it’s com-

mon to retain paper ballots for a certain period of time after an

election before they are eventually discarded. Federal law re-

quires ballots from an election for a federal office to be kept for

at least 22 months. But there are occasions where some voted

ballots that may not be able to be verified are kept separate but

not counted. Senator Daniel Ivey-Soto (D-New Mexico) knows

this from personal experience:

“Several years ago I was involved in a

recount as an election attorney. One of

the ballot boxes was missing the cast bal-

lots from Election Day. Apparently, after

announcing the election results, one of the

precinct boards had ripped the paper bal-

lots in two after they signed their report

listing the votes for each candidate.

The county clerk had saved the trash bag

from that precinct, and during the recount

I asked the Judge to order the Sheriff to

impound the trash bag. The recount was

resolved without having to open the trash

bag. Three years later the sheriff’s office delivered the trash bag

back to the county clerk, where it was opened. The contents

included stale doughnuts, leftover pizza, and the missing

ballots.”

You can’t vote via the Internet So far, states have mostly used the Internet to transmit blank

ballots to military and overseas (UOCAVA) voters, as required

by the 2009 federal MOVE Act. Thirty-one states also allow

these voters to return their voted ballots by electronic transmis-

sion as well (via fax, email or a web-based system). Some

states afford the same privilege to people with disabilities or first

responders who are away from their homes. Is it safe to send

PDFs of voted ballots online or through any Internet-facilitated

system? Many say no—see the July issue of The Canvass for

more information. and

Elections happen in the fall of even-numbered years It is always election season, somewhere. This November, voters

in Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Jersey and Virginia will

cast their ballots for state legislative and gubernatorial races,

with control of the Senate at stake in Virginia. Voters in seven

states will decide on statewide ballot measures in November as

well. And, many municipalities, school boards and other local

entities hold their elections in odd years.

“We have elections three out of every four years in Louisiana,”

says Alfred (Butch) Speer, clerk for the Louisiana House of

Representatives. “We like to say that we elect more of our offi-

cials than any other state.”

It’s not just in the fall or in November either. Many cities hold

elections for mayor and city council in the spring, not to mention

that voters in New Hampshire will kick off the presidential prima-

ry season in February. Kansas this year enacted H 2104, which

moved its spring municipal elections to fall of odd years, hoping

to capitalize on any “November is for voting” attitudes voters

might have.

Running elections is a part-time job Local election officials will tell you that they are often asked,

“What do you do the other 364 days?” Months and even years

go into planning for an election. Officials have to worry about

finding polling places, recruiting and training poll workers and

setting up the infrastructure required to run fair and accurate

elections. Ballots have to be prepared and mailed ahead of time

for military and overseas voters. Early voting and no-excuse

absentee voting often starts several weeks ahead of Election

Day. It’s more like an election season or an election period than

just one day. The Democracy Fund has a great primer on all the

things election officials need to prepare for next year’s presiden-

tial election.

Even after the polls close, the work is still in full swing. Many

jurisdictions can’t tally all their votes by election night and are

still verifying absentee and provisional ballots, so counting can

continue days after the election. Then there are recounts, and

post-election audits. Election results aren’t official until the state

certification date—which is most often two to three weeks after

the election. Let’s be clear—elections are a year-round job.

Provisional and absentee ballots aren’t counted unless the race is close On election night, the media or others call an election for a can-

didate but you’ll never see an election official call it until that

canvass is completed. Those results are unofficial, and the

count goes on until the election is certified.

What’s still counted? Provisional ballots and absentee ballots. In

the case of provisional ballots, many states require voters to

confirm residency or identification before those votes can be

(cont. on page 3)

Sen. Ivey-Soto

Page 3

NCSL: The Canvass October 2015

29. The number of states that are now offering or planning to offer online voter registration. Vermont

became the latest state to launch their system on Oct. 13. In the last two months alone, Kentucky,

Nebraska, and Pennsylvania have all launched online voter registration systems. Massachusetts imple-

mented its system earlier this year as did Hawaii, Washington, D.C. and West Virginia. ,

Oklahoma and New Mexico passed online voter registration legislation but have not yet implemented it.

This flurry of action has led to online voter registration being one of the stories of the year in election

administration.

One big number

return system, although it does require printing, signing, wit-

nessing and scanning a voter certificate and identification sheet.

Elections are priceless Sure, elections are priceless in the same sense that a sunset

over the Pacific is priceless. But in the other sense—that they

are cheap--is sure to garner a heated reaction from any election

official. The costs associated with finding and training poll work-

ers, renting polling places, printing and mailing election-related

materials, and especially the need to re-

place aging voting equipment have all

added to the tab of running elections.

NCSL is joining state and local officials,

academics and other organizations at

looking just how “priceless” elections are.

“Elections are not cheap—with technology

it’s changing even faster,” states King.

“They aren’t cheap but they are priceless

in keeping faith in our democratic process

and in elected officials.”

(Election Misconceptions, cont. from page 2)

And the question of who pays is becoming an important ques-

tion. Because elections and who runs them are so complex

(and there is so much variation) the question of “who pays” is

complicated. Is it states? The feds? Local governments? The

answer might be all of the above. Election officials are in the

public eye creating the infrastructure of democracy, with a lot of

moving parts. If anything goes wrong they are under scrutiny.

Resources matter when perfection is the goal.

Elections don’t matter This is just plain wrong. Elections matter, and each vote mat-

ters. Some elections have been decided by one vote.

“I was first recruited to run for the Senate when there was a

vacancy on the ballot. My selection to be the party nominee

was decided by a one vote margin,” says Ivey-Soto.

The 2014 Voting Experience, produced by The Pew Charitable Trusts. This October analysis is based on a series of surveys with

voters over the course of a few months before and after last year’s November election. The focus was on the most important

people—voters.

The results: Wait times, which were brought to the attention of electioneers everywhere when Obama commented on them in his

2012 acceptance speech, were shorter than most voters expected. Wait times vary greatly from one polling place to another, and

are likely to be longer in a presidential election. The study showed that “mail” ballots often are returned in person or at a polling

place and not by mail at all. And many likely voters changed their minds about how to cast a ballot—in person or by mail. Voters

change their minds about even whether to vote.

Why does any of this matter? “A panel survey on election administration has never been done before, and it gets beyond who

people vote for to how they experience the election process,” said Amy Cohen, officer of The Pew Charitable Trusts’ Voting Infor-

mation Project. “Expectations can color everything about elections, from wait times to voting method, and this research shines a

light on why balancing expectations with actual behavior is an ongoing challenge for administrators.”

Bookmark This

Sen. Bryan King

Page 4

NCSL: The Canvass October 2015

HAVA Funds Distributed to the States and Not Yet Used as of September 30, 2014

Some States Still Have HAVA Funds

State Section 101 Section 251 Total

Alabama 398,605 7,178,856 7,577,461

Alaska 684,618 4,151,244 4,835,862 American

Samoa 66,224 106,098 172,322 Arizona 4,365,903 1,775,238 6,141,141

Arkansas 0 2,435,410 2,435,410 California 3,470,281 88,907,459 92,377,740

Colorado 360,442 1,735,321 2,095,763

Connecticut 0 1,610,256 1,610,256

Delaware 4,314 1,328,661 1,332,975 District of

Columbia 1,038,976 10,816,224 11,855,200 Florida 2,421,618 43,334,817 45,756,435

Georgia 0 3,558,242 3,558,242

Guam 0 0 0 Hawaii 3,390,901 2,967,106 6,358,007 Idaho 2,188,033 85,394 2,273,427

Illinois 545,140 6,684,800 7,229,940

Indiana 0 130,316 143,916

Iowa 234,896 27,240 262,136 Kansas 3,717,658 -3,659,720 3,717,658 Kentucky 3,573,740 11,197,493 14,771,233

Louisiana 0 0 0 Maine 1,286,196 822,071 2,108,267

Maryland 589,034 23,413 612,447 Massachusetts 0 45,564,304 45,564,304 Michigan 8,514,672 26,266,300 34,780,972

Minnesota 0 -12,354 0

Mississippi 0 0 0

State Section 101 Section 251 Total Missouri 1,320,042 2,714,798 4,034,840 Montana 216,852 -333,106 216,852 Nebraska 0 0 0 Nevada 0 1,112,854 1,112,854 New

Hampshire 4,050,053 7,586,381 11,636,434 New Jersey 623,661 10,222,909 10,846,570 New Mexico 0 0 0 New York 4,138,402 15,005,335 19,143,737 North Carolina 0 3,944,526 3,944,526 North Dakota 0 2,697,402 2,697,402 Ohio 0 1,693,314 1,693,314 Oklahoma 238,321 19,008,363 19,246,684 Oregon 0 7,512,753 7,512,753 Pennsylvania 0 6,127,997 6,127,997 Puerto Rico 17,347 4,547,636 4,564,983 Rhode Island 0 0 0 South Carolina 488,701 3,958 492,659 South Dakota 4,770,733 6,267,333 11,038,066 Tennessee 2,780,941 22,644,727 25,425,668 Texas 8,789,156 4,776,834 13,565,990 Utah 18,016 1,104,415 1,122,431 Vermont 0 11,120,655 11,120,655 Virgin Islands 22,788 550,913 573,701 Virginia 599,090 18,427,390 19,026,480 Washington 0 5,771,879 5,771,879 West Virginia 0 1,828,475 1,828,475 Wisconsin 2,748,091 3,520,873 6,268,964 Wyoming 1,374,760 178,508 1,553,268

This fact seems to get all the press: federal funds for improving

elections are running out and are unlikely to be reauthorized

anytime soon. And it’s true. The Help America Vote Act of

2002, which put the one-and-only federal infusion of money

into election administration, is running low and there’s no rea-

son to think more federal money will follow.

This fact doesn’t get much attention: HAVA funds still remain.

According to the Fiscal Year 2014 Annual Grant Expenditure

Report from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC),

24 states still had funds available, or at least did so as of Sept.

30, 2014. The report was released in September 2015.

As of that date, $3.5 billion had been distributed to the states,

some of which has not yet been expended by them. That num-

ber includes interest accrued since the distribution date.

What’s left unspent isn’t chump change: $482,727,110. And on

top of that, a few states have even more funds available to

them that they haven’t yet requested. The total of not-yet-

requested funds is an additional $5.5 million, according to

Monica Evans, the director of grants management at the EAC.

Georgia has the lion’s share of it, with $1.9 million in 2010

monies yet to be claimed. Twenty-two states have something

less than $40,000 remaining. To find out if your state has a few

thousand dollars still coming, contact Evans.

“We’d love for these states to get all this money,” said Christy

McCormick, the chair of the EAC. “The states have to use this

money if it’s going to be of any value.”

There are reasons states aren’t at zero yet. California, for

instance, has not yet met certain standards relating to its

statewide voter registration databases, and can’t spend its

allotment until that work is completed. Other states have cho-

sen to spend their money at a slower burn

. And still other states may be saving theirs for one big

purchase in the near future; DC is an example of this.

The HAVA monies aren’t all created equal. Section 101 funds

can be used in a broad array of election-improvement activities.

Section 251 funds are somewhat more narrowly tailored with a

focus on election technology, voter registration databases and

a few other select uses. See Frequently Asked Questions

Regarding Appropriate Uses of HAVA Funds for the details.

Or, if you’re a legislator from a state that shows a balance, ask

your chief election official what the plan is to use these monies.

He or she will definitely have an answer for you.

Page 5

NCSL: The Canvass October 2015

From the Chair Representative Michelle Ugenti-Rita chairs the House Committee on Elections in the Arizona

House of Representatives. She represents District 23 which includes the city of Scottsdale and

the town of Fountain Hills. Representative Ugenti-Rita spoke to The Canvass on Oct. 22.

“I evaluate bills based on four things: does it enhance and protect the integrity of elections;

does it empower voters; does it enable voter participation; and does it maintain the

consistency of administration. I don’t think elections should be a partisan issue.”

“One of my biggest accomplishments in the past few years was introducing and passing

legislation to consolidate election dates in Arizona. There used to be a wide variety of dates

for elections in odd years that depended on the jurisdiction and the race. And what happens

to voter turnout in off years? It tanks. There is a quantifiable difference that the consolidation

has made with regard to turnout as well as reducing costs for administering elections. When

it comes to increasing turnout—it shouldn’t be about party politics.”

“Ballot harvesting is another issue I’m looking at to specifically limit who can collect and turn in

ballots and how many. It’s important for maintaining the integrity of the election process by

reducing fraud and ensuring voters have confidence in their system. It is counterintuitive to me that someone can collect and

turn in someone else’s ballot. Obviously, there are specific situations in which it may need to be allowed.”

“Election related legislation is very difficult to pass and it should be. It impacts everyone but there is not exactly an industry to

turn to for expertise. You have to go to the voters.”

Read the full interview with Representative Ugenti-Rita.

The Election Administrator’s Perspective Joyce Mascena is the town clerk for Glastonbury, Conn. Originally called Naubuc, residents

named the town after Glastonbury, England, to aid in the search for a new minister. Mascena is

also a past president of the Connecticut Town Clerks Association. She spoke to The Canvass on

Oct. 13.

“The town clerk determines which offices are on the ballot, accepts the Certifications of Party

Endorsements for nominated candidates, creates and orders the ballots, issues, tracks and

reconciles absentee ballots, calls certain recounts and certifies certain elections. The regis-

trars handle voter registration and the polls on Election Day and in all Connecticut towns

there are two registrars, one from each major political party. Does this fragmented system

make sense? I’m not sure it still does and there is some redundancy with all 169 towns in the

state administering separate elections. We are all working toward the same goal but we

should be working in a more streamlined and efficient manner.”

“The secretary is also in the process of developing a new election management system. Without

this system, we’re constantly re-typing the same offices, terms and names on various reports

and forms and submitting them, which only increases the potential for errors. With this new

management system in place we will have the capability to enter the information once on the front end and generate all of our

reports, filings and election results from one program. 2016 is the target “go live” date for this new management system.”

“Last year we received the Democracy Award for having the highest voter turnout in the state in the large town category—just

under 69 percent. We are very proud of that. The registrars and I have established a very good working relationship and have

avoided the problems and pitfalls that have plagued some of the other towns and cities in the state. As a common goal for our

town, we work as a team to run timely, fair, smooth and accurate elections.”

Read the full interview with Mascena.

Glastonbury Town Clerk Joyce Mascena

Representative Michelle Ugenti-Rita

Page 6

The Canvass, an Elections Newsletter for Legislatures © 2015

Published by the National Conference of State Legislatures

William T. Pound, Executive Director

In conjunction with NCSL, funding support for The Canvass is provided

by The Pew Charitable Trusts’ Election Initiatives project.

Any opinions, findings or conclusions in this publication are those of

NCSL and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Pew Charitable

Trusts. Links provided do not indicate NCSL or The Pew Charitable

Trusts endorsement of these sites.

TO SUBSCRIBE, contact TheCanvass@ncsl.org

NCSL: The Canvass October 2015

Worth Noting “People are talking to their governments on 21st century

technology, the government hears them with 20th century

technology and is providing 19th century responses.”—

former Secretary of State Madeline Albright giving the key-

note address at the

.

Speaking of election technology, you have to read Doug

Lewis and Rokey Suleman’s op-ed in The Hill on the com-

ing voting machine crisis. It’s been making the rounds on

several major publications and has been drawing attention

to a critical issue.

Following up on last month, when The Canvass looked at

the Voting Rights Act, DMV office closures in Alabama

have many calling it a violation of the Act and are asking for

a federal probe.

Election law seems to be before the courts a lot lately and

University of California-Irvine Law Professor Rick Hasen

has an interesting look at election law in the Roberts’

Supreme Court.

Ballot access for third party candidates is getting attention

in Pennsylvania. A recent court ruling tried to make things

easier for minor party candidates, but Governor Tom Wolf

is appealing the decision. At issue is the number of signa-

tures required to get on the ballot as well as the mechanism

for challenging those signatures. Check out the August

issue of The Canvass for more information on ballot access

for third party presidential candidates.

More proof that the world of ballot selfies is murky at best—

a mayoral candidate in Fall River, Mass. posted a photo of

himself holding his voted ballot on Facebook and eventually

local law enforcement got involved after several complaints

were received. It’s a misdemeanor for a voter to allow their

ballot to be seen under Massachusetts state law.

The October 8 issue of electionlineWeekly has an interest-

ing look at the challenge of making online voter registration

accessible for those with disabilities. OVR is the story of the

year in elections and many states will be keeping an eye on

this issue as they look at the pros and cons of OVR.

Be sure to check out the latest on Los Angeles County’s

plan to design and use its own voting systems. Plus, pre-

viewing it at South by Southwest Eco is pretty cool.

Virginia has an interesting debate going on about the use of

e-signatures for absentee ballots, renewing the questions

of the balance of convenience for voters with preventing

fraud.

Oops—election officials in Prince William County, Md. are

faced with fixing expensive ballot typos for the Nov. 3 elec-

tions. The cost of reprinting the ballots could be in the thou-

sands of dollars.

Five states are heading to the polls this fall, so check out NCSL’s pre-

election analysis and stay tuned to NCSL’s StateVote webpage for 2015

election results.

Save the date: NCSL’s Capitol Forum will take place December 8-11 in

Washington D.C. We have some great election

Election Policy: Three Top Topics, an overview of legislative action on

elections this year and a look at

Add in a lobby day on Capitol Hill and other great issue forums and it’s a can’t-miss event. See the

online agenda for more information and register soon.

Thanks for reading, and please stay in touch.

—Wendy Underhill and Dan Diorio