Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Why local election administrators are key to ensuring all voters may participate in democracy

Opinion

Maricopa Country, Ariz., recorder Adrian Fontes

Maricopa County, Ariz., saw voter turnout increase by 42 percent from 2014 to 2018, thanks at least in part to reforms put in place by the elections chief, Adrian Fontes.

Fontes, a Democrat, was first elected in 2016 as the Maricopa County recorder, the chief elections official for Arizona's most populous county.

Due to the coronavirus, many states that have held their presidential primaries on schedule this year experienced a decrease in turnout, chaos and confusion. As we know, the integrity and inclusiveness of our elections depends on a well-run election system — which is exactly why Maricopa County saw an increase in turnout when Arizonans cast their ballots three weeks ago.

On every Election Day, Americans eagerly tune into the news the moment the polls close, expecting decisive conclusions about the future of their country. But these flashy headlines don't often capture the rubber-meets-road work of democracy unfolding on the ground: the science of election administration.

As the head election official for Phoenix and its closest suburbs, I know this better than most. Reading the news makes elections seem simple. However, in a nation as huge and diverse as ours, administering these contests is incredibly complicated. And as we've seen so far this year — from the long Super Tuesday voting lines in Texas and California to the muddled caucus results in Iowa — each jurisdiction faces unique challenges.

That's where election administrators come in.


Sometimes called county recorders, we oversee the nitty-gritty of the election process. They are responsible for ensuring that people are registered to vote and that infrastructure is set up so that, come Election Day, people are able to vote with ease and their votes are properly counted.

Unfortunately, some have instead used their power and position to stop voters from casting ballots. This can be seen in the purges of the Georgia voting rolls by Brian Kemp when he was both secretary of state and the GOP candidate for governor in 2018, and by North Carolina's recent attempt to disenfranchise many in poor and minority communities through a restrictive voter ID law.

Compared with states such as Maine and California, which have gone to great lengths to protect the right to vote, it's clear a person's right and ability to vote can be determined by ZIP code.

Four years ago, I inherited a deeply flawed election system — like too many around the country. After 30 years of mismanagement by my predecessors, the very groups of people most urgently in need of representation in our democracy were often the same ones who couldn't access the ballot box. They need and deserve a seat at the table but have had their voices silenced.

I sought to turn our system around by putting voter outreach and accessibility at the core of our mission. After a series of "community roundtables," we've sought to make impactful changes based on what we learned. We improved poll worker training and sought to make our elections more accessible. We optimized our voting machines to make them more user friendly — not a mass of confusing fine print or flashy, colorful displays. We strengthened no-excuse absentee voting, allowing voting by mail without restriction until Election Day.

We're immensely proud of the strides we've taken to count everyone's vote. And the numbers back us up: We saw a 42 percent turnout increase between the 2014 and 2018 midterms.

To be sure, though, there is always more that we — and other counties across the country — can do to bring more people in.

My team recently proposed shifting entirely to voting by mail, but unfortunately we were turned down. Additionally, we should push for automatic voter registration and same-day registration and oppose overly restrictive voter ID laws and arbitrary voter roll purges. We should support independent redistricting measures that will end partisan gerrymandering. Many of these important reforms are included in HR 1, the For the People Act, which passed the House a year ago but remains stalled in the Senate.

But in order for us to keep improving, the federal government must provide the money for election administrators to do their jobs well. For starters, Congress should fully fund the Election Assistance Commission, the regulatory body that issues accessibility guidelines and approves secure voting machines. It should also provide states robust funding for election security efforts, like upgrading outdated or inaccessible voting equipment. Further, it should increase resources for training registration administrators and other poll workers like the Certified Elections Registration Administrator program so that all election officials are fully equipped to run a smooth process.

Ultimately, elections are about people. They are about giving each of our citizens a path to making themselves heard. It's the job of elections administrators to make sure every voice in our democracy counts. In this time of uncertainty, it's more important than ever to make sure our election systems are well run, secure and can work to the best of their ability.


Read More

A person signing a piece of paper with other people around them.

Javon Jackson, center, was able to register to vote following passage of a 2019 Nevada law that restored voting rights to formerly incarcerated individuals.

The Nation Is Missing Millions of Voters Due to Lack of Rights for Former Felons

If you gathered every American with a prison record into one contiguous territory and admitted it to the union, you would create the 12th-largest state. It would be home to at least 7 million to 8 million people and hold a dozen votes in the Electoral College.

In a close presidential race, this hypothetical state of the formerly incarcerated could decide who wins the White House.

Keep ReadingShow less
People standing at voting booths.

The proposed SAVE Act and MEGA Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, risking the disenfranchisement of millions of eligible Americans.

Getty Images, EvgeniyShkolenko

The SAVE Act is a Solution in Search of A Problem

The federal government seems to be barreling toward a federal election power grab. Trump's State of the Union address called for the Senate to push through the SAVE Act, which has already passed the House, in the name of so-called "election integrity." And the SAVE Act isn’t the only such bill. Like the SAVE Act, the Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act—introduced in the House—would require voters to provide a document outlined in the Act that allegedly proves their U.S. citizenship. We’ve been down this road before in Texas, and spoiler alert: it was unworkable.

Both the SAVE and MEGA Acts would disenfranchise millions of eligible U.S. citizens without making our federal elections more secure. They seek to roll out a faulty federal voter registration system, despite the existing separate registration and voting process for state and local elections. And these Acts target a minuscule “problem”—but would unleash mass voter purges and confusion.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stickers with the words "I Voted Today."

Virginia is on its way to be the 19th jurisdiction to adopt the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, bringing the U.S. closer to electing presidents by the national popular vote.

Getty Images, EyeWolf

Virginia On The Path to Join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

NPVIC is an agreement among U.S. states and the District of Columbia to award all their electoral votes to the presidential ticket that wins the overall popular vote in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. It is considered a pragmatic, voluntary state-based initiative because it aims to ensure the winner of the national popular vote wins the presidency without requiring a constitutional amendment, operating instead within the existing Electoral College framework by utilizing states' constitutional authority to appoint electors. If enough states join the NPVIC to reach a total of 270 electoral votes, the United States will effectively shift from a winner-take-all (WTA) regime to a national popular vote system for electing the President.

With Virginia's adoption, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact will be adopted by eighteen states and the District of Columbia, collectively holding 222 electoral votes. The compact requires 270 electoral votes (a majority of the 538 total) to take effect. It currently needs forty-eight more electoral votes to become active.

Keep ReadingShow less
With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

Should the U.S. nationalize elections? A constitutional analysis of federalism, the Elections Clause, and the risks of centralized control over voting systems.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Why Nationalizing Elections Threatens America’s Federalist Design

The Federalism Question: Why Nationalizing Elections Deserves Skepticism

The renewed push to nationalize American elections, presented as a necessary reform to ensure uniformity and fairness, deserves the same skepticism our founders directed toward concentrated federal power. The proposal, though well-intentioned, misunderstands both the constitutional architecture of our republic and the practical wisdom in decentralized governance.

The Constitutional Framework Matters

The Constitution grants states explicit authority over the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections, with Congress retaining only the power to "make or alter such Regulations." This was not an oversight by the framers; it was intentional design. The Tenth Amendment reinforces this principle: powers not delegated to the federal government remain with the states and the people. Advocates for nationalization often cite the Elections Clause as justification, but constitutional permission is not constitutional wisdom.

Keep ReadingShow less