Partisan Games Means Continue Barriers to the Ballot Box for Ohio Voters
June 11, 2010
Sabrina E. Williams 202/728-9557 or 305/904-3960
(Columbus, Ohio)—Today, Advancement Project, a leading voter protection advocacy organization, released an issue brief examining the ramifications if Ohio lawmakers fail to enact comprehensive election reform to correct provisions of the election code that impede the ability of voters to participate in elections.
“Ohio lawmakers are going down a road that could end up being a serious disservice to voters,” said Donita Judge, Advancement Project’s voter protection attorney for Ohio. “The tendency during election years is to focus on the ‘horse race’ and candidates’ political strategies and fundraising, without a second thought as to the importance of the administration of the election itself.”
In 2009, Ohio lawmakers introduced two election reform bills, Senate Bill 8 (S.B. 8) and House Bill 260 (H.B. 260). Subsequently, both bills were amended and substitution bills were later introduced by their respective General Assembly Sponsors. H.B. 260 is the result of bipartisan reform proposals that were generated after the November 2008 general election. It includes recommendations from election officials, voters, and community advocates developed during post-2008 election summits hosted by the office of Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner. H.B. 260 would provide sweeping changes to Ohio’s election code, including changes to absentee ballot procedures, provisional ballot rules, voter registration, voter ID, and voter challenges to name a few. S.B. 8 is a narrower reform bill sponsored primarily by the Republican caucus. Both measures have now stalled in the Legislature, and it is currently unclear when or whether they will be brought back up during the current legislative session.
Advancement Project’s issue brief highlights four important election reform provisions of S.B. 8 and H.B. 260, that if adopted will reduce voter disenfranchisement:
- Provisional ballots rules would be simplified, reducing the numbers of reasons for casting provisional ballots from 13 to 3. Provisional ballots cast in the wrong precinct would be counted for those races or issues for which a voter is eligible to cast a ballot.
- Voter registration rules would guarantee that a voter registration application would not be rejected as a result of a nonmatch with other state and federal databases.
- Voter challenges rules would prohibit individuals, organizations, and political parties from compiling lists of voters to challenge on the sole basis of mail returned as undeliverable, unclaimed mail, or foreclosure locations.
- Voter ID would be simplified to require a valid photo ID or permit voter to submit an affirmation statement affirming that the voter does not have the required photo ID.
“Lawmakers cannot recess without fixing the myriad of problems that plague the state’s election laws, concluded Judge.” “Ohio voters’ right to vote should not be compromised and Ohio voters should not bear the burden of having their vote rejected by rigid rules. For the good of Ohio, Ohio legislators must enact election reform legislation that allows all eligible Ohioans, who are registered to vote, to cast ballots that are counted.”
Filed under Provisional Ballots, Voter Caging and Challenges, Voter Identification, Voter Registration, Ohio
