Elections: Issues Affecting Military and Overseas Absentee Voters
(09-MAY-01, GAO-01-704T).
The extent and quality of federal voter assistance for military
personnel and overseas citizens varied considerably for the
November 2000 election. The Department of Defense (DOD) has
developed some useful information tools but many overseas
military personnel were unaware of them. Moreover, the military
services did not always comply with DOD requirements to appoint
and train Voting Assistance Officers, brief military personnel on
how to go about voting, or maintain sufficient supplies of voting
materials. Lack of emphasis by commanders and limited oversight
by service Inspectors General and installation commanders appear
to be the chief reasons why some military installations did not
fully comply with DOD guidance on how voting assistance programs
should be carried out. Many states have worked with DOD's Federal
Voting Assistance Program to implement some of the program's
legislative initiatives that make it easier for military
personnel and overseas citizens to register, obtain ballots, and
vote; however, voters continue to face some challenges.
Information on the precise number of military and overseas
absentee votes that local jurisdictions disqualified nationwide
in the November 2000 election and the reasons for
disqualification is not available. Many local officials told GAO
they did not track data on these specific groups of absentee
voters and could not readily provide the data.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-01-704T
ACCNO: A00978
TITLE: Elections: Issues Affecting Military and Overseas
Absentee Voters
DATE: 05/09/2001
SUBJECT: Armed forces abroad
Elections
Military personnel
DOD Federal Voting Assistance Program
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Testimony. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-01-704T
Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Military Personnel, Committee on Armed
Services, House of Representatives
United States General Accounting Office
GAO For Release on Delivery Expected at 2: 30 p. m., EDT Wednesday, May 9,
2001 ELECTIONS
Issues Affecting Military and Overseas Absentee Voters
Statement of David M. Walker, Comptroller General of the United States
GAO- 01- 704T
Page 1 GAO- 01- 704T
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: I am pleased to be here today
to discuss the status and results to date of our ongoing work for this
Committee on military and overseas citizens? absentee voting. This effort is
part of a broad body of work we are doing to help Congress assess the need
for changes in the procedures and equipment used to administer federal
elections. As you know, the 2000 presidential election brought to light
concerns about a number of issues, including the reliability of voting
machines, training of polling place workers, and the extent to which local
jurisdictions accepted votes from members of the military and civilians
living overseas. As requested by the Committee, we are reviewing programs
and policies in place to assist military and overseas citizens in voting.
Our work includes site visits and interviews at state and county government
offices, military installations in the U. S. and overseas, and U. S.
embassies and consulates. We plan to summarize the results of this work in a
report to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees in September 2001.
That report will contain a more detailed description of our work, along with
our conclusions and any appropriate recommendations.
The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act of 1986 requires
states to permit military personnel and their dependents as well as overseas
citizens to vote absentee in federal elections. The act covers about 6. 1
million citizens, including 2. 7 million military members and their
dependents at home and abroad and roughly 3. 4 million citizens who reside
overseas. The act also recommends that states adopt a number of provisions
that facilitate absentee voting by these populations. The Secretary of
Defense is the presidential designee with primary responsibility for
educating and assisting voters covered by the act and for working with
states to facilitate absentee voting. Voter education and assistance efforts
for military personnel are largely implemented by the military services; the
State Department assists overseas citizens and federal employees assigned to
embassies and consulates.
My testimony today will address our preliminary observations on (1) the
extent and quality of voter assistance for uniformed and overseas citizens,
(2) challenges to these voters posed by state and local requirements, and
(3) the extent of and reasons for disqualification of ballots cast by these
voters.
Information about the military services is based on questionnaires and
discussion groups held with 970 officer and enlisted active duty
servicemembers, 284 DOD civilians and dependents of active duty Methodology
Page 2 GAO- 01- 704T
personnel, and 154 Voting Assistance Officers at 36 military installations
and on ships around the world. We judgmentally selected installations from
all services and in six countries (Germany, Italy, Japan, Korea, Turkey, and
the United Kingdom). We asked installation officials to provide discussion
group participants who met certain criteria such as being eligible to vote
and deployed overseas during the 2000 election. We conducted our work
jointly with DOD?s Office of the Inspector General, which was requested by
the former Secretary of Defense to review DOD?s voting assistance program.
Information about the State Department and civilian overseas citizens was
derived from similar questionnaires and discussion groups held with federal
employees and private citizens in six countries (France, Germany, Israel,
Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom) and 98 responses from a cable inquiry
sent to the remaining 210 embassies and consulates around the world. We
worked jointly with the State Department?s Office of the Inspector General
to collect this information. While we attempted to contact a cross section
of potential voters from all the military services and citizens living
overseas, their comments cannot be projected to represent anyone beyond
those people with whom we spoke. Further, we visited 4 states- California,
Florida, New Jersey, and Texas- and 16 counties within those states to
obtain information on state and local procedures; this information cannot be
projected beyond those locations. We selected California, Florida, and Texas
because they have the largest numbers of potential military voters and chose
New Jersey as an example of a state that has a smaller potential pool of
military voters. Finally, our telephone survey of 179 local election
offices, used to collect data on disqualified ballots, is ongoing.
The extent and quality of federal voter assistance for military personnel
and overseas citizens varied considerably for the November 2000 general
election. To its credit, the Department of Defense (DOD) has developed some
useful information tools but many overseas military personnel we spoke to
were unaware of them. Moreover, the military services did not always comply
with DOD requirements to appoint and train Voting Assistance Officers (who
are assigned this role in addition to their primary duties), brief military
personnel on how to go about voting, or maintain sufficient supplies of
voting materials, according to military voters in discussion groups we held
at 36 installations around the world. Lack of emphasis by commanders and
limited oversight by service Inspectors General and installation commanders
appear to be the chief reasons why some military installations did not fully
comply with DOD guidance on how voting assistance programs should be carried
out. Finally, the State Department provided citizens abroad with a variety
of useful information, Summary
Page 3 GAO- 01- 704T
according to overseas citizens and federal employees we spoke to, although
more outreach could be beneficial.
Many states have worked with DOD?s Federal Voting Assistance Program to
implement some of the program?s legislative initiatives that make it easier
for military personnel and overseas citizens to register, obtain ballots,
and vote; however, voters continue to face some challenges. Many military
and overseas voters we spoke to expressed concerns about (1) varied state
and local requirements for absentee voting, (2) the lack of feedback from
local jurisdictions about the status of their applications for registration
or ballots, and (3) the short time frame provided by many states and local
jurisdictions for sending and returning ballots. Remedies such as extending
deadlines for receiving ballots beyond election day- as is the case in 14
states and the District of Columbia- have led to requirements, such as
postmarks on ballots to ensure that ballots were cast overseas and on time,
which further complicate the process. Many states are examining the need for
changes to their election processes, including requirements for absentee
voting, as a result of issues raised during the 2000 election. Continued
efforts by DOD officials to work with the states to simplify their
procedures, modify their election schedules, or allow more use of technology
such as faxing and the Internet to speed some portions of the voting process
may help alleviate the challenges. However, security and privacy issues pose
challenges to widespread use of the Internet for casting votes, at least in
the near term, according to some DOD and state officials. 1 Moreover, state
and local officials told us they must balance ease of voting with protecting
the integrity of the voting process.
Information on the precise number of military and overseas absentee votes
that local jurisdictions disqualified nationwide in the November 2000
election and the reasons for disqualification is not available. Many local
officials we spoke to told us they did not track data on these specific
groups of absentee voters and could not readily provide the data. While the
available data on absentee voting is spotty, the preliminary results of our
survey of 179 local election jurisdictions show the most common reasons
ballots were disqualified are (1) the ballot arrived after the established
deadline and (2) the envelope or form accompanying the ballot was not
completed properly. In the two states we visited where extended
1 We are reviewing technology issues as part of our ongoing work on election
issues for the Senate leadership.
Page 4 GAO- 01- 704T
deadlines could make postmarking an issue (Florida and Texas), data on
ballots disqualified due to postmarking was incomplete. Our limited review
of military postmarking procedures after the election did not indicate that
missing postmarks represented a systemic problem.
Voters, local election jurisdictions, states, and the federal government all
play important roles in ensuring that ballots are successfully cast in an
election. All military servicemembers and U. S. citizens living overseas who
vote absentee face a multi- step process to comply with state and local
voting requirements (See fig. 1). They must register and request absentee
ballots, cast their ballots in accordance with administrative requirements
(such as providing a signature or having the ballot appropriately
witnessed), and send them in time to meet state deadlines. Military voters
must plan ahead, particularly when deployed during elections. Moreover,
military and overseas voters require more time to transmit voting materials
because of distance.
Figure 1: Steps in the Absentee Voting Process
Source: GAO.
Background
Register to vote
Request absentee ballot
Receive ballot from local voting jurisdiction
Fill out and return absentee ballot
Meet state & local election requirements Ballot
box F
ederal Votin g Assistance Program
Ballot
Page 5 GAO- 01- 704T
The constitutional framework for elections contemplates both state and
federal roles. States are responsible for administering state and federal
elections and incur the costs associated with these activities. 2 However,
Congress has authority to affect the administration of elections in certain
ways. Congress? authority to regulate congressional elections is derived
from the Elections Clause of the Constitution, which courts have held grants
Congress broad authority to override state regulations in this area. 3
Congressional authority in presidential elections is more limited in the
text of the Constitution. 4 However, although case law is sparse, the courts
have upheld statutory provisions regulating presidential elections that go
beyond the specific provisions in the Constitution, which only refer to the
timing for choosing the electors.
Congress has passed legislation relating to federal elections, pursuant to
its various constitutional powers. An example of such legislation is the
Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act of 1986, which protects
the rights of (1) uniformed servicemembers and all other voters living
overseas and (2) uniformed servicemembers and their dependents within the
United States but living out of their voting jurisdiction to vote by
absentee ballot in federal elections. 5 Under the act, states must process
valid voter registration applications received 30 days or more before the
election. In addition, states must accept Federal Write- In Absentee Ballots
for federal elections in the event state ballots are not received, provided
the voter is registered, the state ballot application is timely, and the
federal ballot is submitted from overseas. State law, in general, governs
the processing and acceptance of all absentee ballots submitted under the
act. Further, the act contains a number of recommendations to the states to
facilitate voting by citizens covered by the act, including the acceptance
of a Federal Post Card Application to simultaneously register and request
absentee ballots. Finally, the Attorney General is given the authority to
bring civil actions in federal court to enforce the act.
The Secretary of Defense implements his responsibilities as the presidential
designee under the act through the Federal Voting Assistance
2 Elections: The Scope of Congressional Authority in Election
Admininistration (GAO- 01- 470, March, 13 2001). 3 Article I, Section 4,
Clause 1. 4 Article II, Section 1, Clause 4. 5 42 USC 1973ff- 1973ff- 6.
Page 6 GAO- 01- 704T
Program, located in the Office of the Secretary of Defense?s Administration
and Management Office. With a fiscal year 2001 budget of $5.1 million and a
staff of 13, the program?s mission is to inform U. S. citizens worldwide
about their right to vote, foster voting participation, and work with states
to simplify the registration and absentee voting process. The Federal Voting
Assistance Program coordinates with DOD components and the State Department
to provide information to military personnel who vote absentee and to U. S.
citizens who reside abroad.
The Federal Voting Assistance Program provides a number of useful
information resources to voters and Voting Assistance Officers, but these
resources are not highly utilized. While some military installations we
visited generally met DOD?s goal of providing information and assistance to
voters, some installations did not meet DOD and service requirements because
they did not provide sufficient numbers of Voting Assistance Officers,
voting materials, and voter training. This variability in executing the
program is due to a lack of command emphasis at some installations and lack
of program oversight by some of the DOD components. American citizens
overseas generally viewed the State Department?s Voting Assistance Program
as providing useful assistance but believed that dissemination of
information on the right to vote and voting assistance resources could be
improved.
The Federal Voting Assistance Program publishes a variety of useful
information tools to inform voters worldwide about voting rights, but many
of the overseas servicemembers we spoke to were unaware of them.
Specifically, the program has developed (1) a Voting Assistance Guide
containing state voting requirements, (2) a web site with voting information
and links to state web sites, and (3) toll- free phone numbers to call for
voting information. Over 80 percent of the Voting Assistance Officers we
spoke with found both the voting assistance guide and Web site useful.
However, for the 970 servicemembers we spoke to, we found
about 40 percent were unaware of the guide,
approximately 50 percent were unaware of the web site, and
about 74 percent were unaware of the toll- free phone number. We also
found that a toll- free number published widely on promotional posters can
only be used in the United States. Moreover, on ships and submarines, phone
lines are limited, and sailors are charged $1 per minute even for toll- free
calls. Extent and Quality of
Programs to Assist Military and Overseas Voters Vari ed
Federal Voting Assistance Program Is an Underutilized Source of Information
Page 7 GAO- 01- 704T
Despite a DOD directive requiring them, some installations we visited had no
installation Voting Assistance Officers, who coordinate the voting
assistance program of all units and commands located at military
installations. Also, Unit Voting Assistance Officers who assist individual
voters, were not always appointed or, in some cases, appeared to be spread
too thin. DOD?s directive states that Voting Assistance Officers should be
appointed at all levels of command and be readily available and equipped to
give personal assistance to voters for all elections. However, military
personnel are expected to fulfill these duties in addition to carrying out
their primary roles as warfighters and mission support staff. Service
requirements on how many voters a Unit Voting Assistance Officer is
responsible for varies. The Air Force requires one such officer for as many
as 20 voters, the Army requires one at the company level (as many as 190
voters), and the Marine Corps requires one at each battalion (about 900
voters). The Navy has not established specific requirements. About 30
percent of the overseas Voting Assistance Officers we spoke to were assigned
to provide assistance to 250 or more people. Slightly over onethird of the
servicemembers we spoke with told us they did not know who their Voting
Assistance Officer was.
In addition, we found that many Voting Assistance Officers were not aware of
basic DOD or service requirements. DOD requires that Voting Assistance
Officers be trained, but neither DOD nor the services specify the mode of
that training. Around 85 percent of 154 Voting Assistance Officers we spoke
to told us they were self- taught; only 48 of those we spoke to had
participated in one of the 70 training workshops sponsored by the Federal
Voting Assistance Program. According to the program?s director, the number
of workshops offered was limited primarily by the availability of program
staff. At several locations we visited, Voting Assistance Officers did not
know of the DOD requirement to personally deliver a Federal Post Card
Application to each overseas servicemember by August 15 or the need to
provide training to servicemembers on the absentee voting process.
Additionally, we found unit Voting Assistance Officers who were unaware of
the Federal Write- In Absentee Ballot and when to use it. Furthermore, at a
number of installations we also found that unit Voting Assistance Officers
did not know about service- specific voting assistance program requirements
and implementing instructions, leaving them unprepared to meet the needs of
potential voters.
We also found that voting supplies such as Federal Post Card Applications
and Federal Write- In Absentee Ballots were not always provided in
sufficient quantities at some installations. DOD recommends that four
Federal Post Card Applications and one Federal Write In Absentee Ballot
Extent and Quality of
Service Voting Education and Assistance Efforts Varied
Page 8 GAO- 01- 704T
be available for every servicemember and eligible family member. However,
one Voting Assistance Officer told us that his ship deployed without Federal
Write- In Absentee Ballots, and another Unit Voting Assistance Officer also
told us that she was only able to obtain 20 such ballots for her unit of 2,
000 people.
DOD requires that all servicemembers receive at least one briefing on the
absentee voting process in years with a federal election. However, 60
percent of the 970 servicemembers we spoke to said they had not received a
briefing. During several small group discussions, we met with servicemembers
who were unfamiliar with the Federal Post Card Application and found a
significant number of servicemembers who had no knowledge of the Federal
Write- In Absentee Ballot. During these discussions, both officers and
enlisted servicemembers told us they believed that training would improve
their ability to request, obtain, and complete absentee ballots.
Installation and organization commanders? varying emphasis on the program
contributed to the mixed success of the services? voting assistance efforts.
More than 40 percent of the 970 active duty servicemembers we spoke with
believed that not enough emphasis was placed on voting during the last
election. While some commanders, such as the Commander- in- Chief, U. S.
Forces Korea, placed a great deal of emphasis on the voting program by
showing support in public service announcements and developing a theater-
wide voting action plan, others clearly placed little emphasis on the
program. For example, one commander described the voting program as another
administrative burden on officers who have more important things to do.
Although command emphasis is essential for a successful voting program,
DOD?s directive contains prohibitions against ordering servicemembers to
vote.
There is very little oversight or evaluation of the military?s voting
assistance programs. Although the DOD directive states that voting programs
are to be inspected by the service Inspectors General, only the Air Force
and the Marine Corps are conducting these inspections; however, their
comprehensiveness varies. In addition to inspections by service Inspectors
General, DOD?s directive also requires commands to evaluate their voting
programs. The Army and the Air Force have included this requirement for
evaluation in their voting guidance, but not all of the installations we
visited had conducted these evaluations. Navy and Marine Corps guidance is
silent on the need for program evaluation.
Page 9 GAO- 01- 704T
In discussions with federal employees and U. S. citizens living abroad, we
found that most had not encountered problems receiving assistance at the
embassy or consulate and that some government employees and citizens praised
their embassies and consulates? voting efforts. However, some overseas
citizens told us that the quality of voting assistance at an embassy or
consulate varied depending on who was providing assistance and that some
citizens do not have the same level of exposure to government resources.
Citizens may receive voting assistance from consular officers, student
interns, and Foreign Service Nationals 6 who may not have received much, if
any, formal training on absentee voting. State Department guidance requires
that Voting Assistance Officers familiarize themselves with DOD?s Voting
Assistance Guide, but does not require that they receive formal training.
Twenty- two posts specifically requested that more training be provided in
the future.
Many of the citizens who reported positively on embassy and consulate voting
assistance had voted absentee two or more times (80%) in the past and were
aware of the Federal Voting Assistance Guide (75%), so their level of
exposure to government resources may be greater than that of newcomers to
absentee voting and of U. S. citizens who have limited contact with an
embassy. In group discussions with private U. S. citizens, we were told
about citizens who were unaware of the Federal Write- in Absentee Ballot or
that they could use the post office at the embassy to mail their voting
material. Thirty- three posts said that many citizens seeking assistance
were unable to vote because they did not understand the requirements for
absentee voting, including deadlines for registering to vote and requesting
a ballot. Some thought they could vote at the embassy or consulate on
election day. Overseas citizens that live at some distance from embassies
and consulates may also have been less exposed to voting information and
faced additional challenges. For example, citizens eligible to vote in the
five states 7 requiring that registration forms or voting materials be
notarized must either travel to a consulate or pay a private notary, which
we were told can cost several hundred dollars or more.
6 Foreign Service Nationals are non- U. S. citizens directly hired by
embassies and consulates. 7 Alabama, Delaware, Michigan, Mississippi, and
Vermont. State Department Provides
Useful Voting Assistance but More Outreach Would Be Beneficial
Page 10 GAO- 01- 704T
Many embassies and consulates said better dissemination of information on
the right to vote and the overseas absentee voting process could alleviate
some of the problems voters encounter. For example, some private U. S.
citizens suggested that the U. S. government could increase outreach by
funding public service announcements in print and televised media widely
available to Americans who reside overseas. Thirty- two posts suggested that
the federal government make greater use of the Internet, print and televised
media, and consular outreach such as email lists and staff trips around the
district to provide voting information. However, some Voting Assistance
Officers told us limited consular resources constrained the extent to which
they could expand these and other voter outreach efforts.
Although many states have worked with the Federal Voting Assistance Program
to make it easier for military and overseas citizens to vote absentee,
voters continue to face some challenges in discerning the specific
requirements that apply to them, meeting tight time frames that leave little
room for error or delay, and obtaining feedback on the status of their
applications. Continued efforts by DOD?s Federal Voting Assistance Program
to work with states to simplify their procedures, modify their election
schedules, and expand use of the Internet and electronic mail may help to
ease time pressures and enhance communications with voters, particularly for
registration and requesting ballots. However, DOD, state, and local election
officials view security and privacy concerns as obstacles to widespread use
of the Internet to cast ballots in the near future.
The Federal Voting Assistance Program has encouraged states to adopt 11
legislative initiatives- such as eliminating notarization requirements-
designed to facilitate voting for military and overseas citizens. Many
states have implemented some of these proposals. For example, only five
states require that registration forms or voting materials be notarized.
Also, 45 states allow overseas and military voters to register and apply for
absentee ballots in one step for both primary and general elections in a
calendar year, according to Federal Voting Assistance Program data. Federal
Voting Assistance Program officials have continued to work with states to
identify ways to make the absentee voting process easier. For example,
following the November 2000 election, the program?s director wrote to state
election directors suggesting legislative provisions their states could
adopt to make the absentee voting process easier. Moreover, as a result of
issues identified during November 2000 election, many states are examining
the need for changes to their requirements. States Have Taken
Steps to Facilitate Military and Overseas Absentee Voting, but Some
Challenges Remain
States Have Taken Some Steps to Simplify Absentee Voting Process
Page 11 GAO- 01- 704T
Some military and overseas voters and Voting Assistance Officers told us
that varying state and county requirements resulted in confusion about
registration and residency and about the deadlines for registering,
requesting a ballot, and returning the voted ballot. Figure 2 shows the
variation in states? deadlines for registration. States also have different
deadlines for receiving overseas ballots. As shown in figure 3, these
deadlines range from the day before the election to 15 days after the
election. 8 The extensions are necessary in some states to ensure that
military and overseas absentee voters have at least 30 days between the time
ballots are mailed and the deadline for receipt of voted ballots.
Figure 2: States? Absentee Registration Deadlines for Overseas Voters
Note: Numbers include District of Columbia. Four states waive registration
for military voters only. Two states have earlier registration deadlines for
overseas civilians.
Source: GAO legal analysis
8 For the 2000 election, Alaska, Arkansas, the District of Columbia,
Florida, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New York, North Dakota,
Ohio, Texas, Utah, Washington, and West Virginia had extended ballot
deadlines for overseas absentee voters. Voters Must Understand
and Comply with Varying Requirements
Number of states 0 5
10 15
20 25
30 Registration not required 21- 30 days prior
to election 11- 20
days prior to election 0- 10
days prior to election 12
3 21
15
Page 12 GAO- 01- 704T
Figure 3: States? Absentee Ballot Deadlines for Overseas Voters
Note: Numbers include District of Columbia. Source: GAO legal analysis
Many military personnel and overseas citizens we spoke to believe a
standardized registration and absentee balloting system for all the states
would make the voting process much easier. Some state and county officials
agreed that greater standardization would make voting easier for military
and overseas voters, although they noted that standardized election systems
might require new legislation in states. However, obtaining political
support for changes may be difficult because state legislators may have
differing views on how to best balance competing objectives, such as
promoting voter participation and ensuring the integrity of the voting
process.
Voters must also cope with registration requirements that vary when local
jurisdictions interpret state requirements differently. We found variation
in the counties we visited in California, Florida, New Jersey, and Texas as
to how they implemented state laws and regulations, with some holding
strictly to the letter of the law and others applying more flexibility in
accepting registration applications and ballots. For example,
Number of states 0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
Due before election
Due on election day
Due after election a 4
32 15
Page 13 GAO- 01- 704T
In Florida, officials in three counties told us they allow registration of
applicants who have never lived in the county, while the fourth county said
they require a specific address where the applicant actually lived.
In New Jersey, officials in three counties said they accepted any ballot
that showed a signature anywhere on the envelope while the fourth county
disqualified any ballot that did not strictly meet all technical
requirements.
Some local election officials in the states we visited took actions to help
absentee voters, including military and overseas voters, comply with state
and local voting requirements by tracking down missing information on the
registration form or ballot envelope and ensuring that applications and
ballots went to the right jurisdictions. However, local officials told us
they must balance voting convenience with ensuring the integrity of the
voting process. This balance often requires the exercise of judgment on the
part of local election officials.
Military and overseas voters face tight timeframes to accomplish multiple
tasks required to vote. The Federal Voting Assistance Program, local
election officials, and military and overseas voters we spoke to agreed that
30 days is the minimum needed to allow a ballot to reach an overseas voter
and be returned to a local jurisdiction. 9 The Federal Voting Assistance
Program recommends a 45- day interval between mailing ballots to voters and
the deadline for receipt of voted ballots, but late primaries, runoffs, and
local issues are often not resolved in time to allow for a 45- day
turnaround time. 10 Our fieldwork showed that 11 of the 16 counties we
visited mailed final ballots in time to provide 30 days or more for receipt
of the voted ballot. Moreover, only 5 of these counties mailed final ballots
to allow 45 days between mailing the ballot and the election. Because of the
tight timeframes, Florida and California mailed advance ballots to absentee
voters about 45 to 60 days before the election to ensure adequate time to
return the voted ballot. However, these ballots represented draft ballots
based on information available at the time and did not reflect the
9 There is no such specific requirement in the Uniformed and Overseas
Citizens Absentee Voting Act. 10 According to the Federal Voting Assistance
Program, since 1976, the Justice Department has taken legal action in 39
cases under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act and its
predecessor (The Overseas Citizens Voting Rights Act of 1975) to ensure that
states and local jurisdictions provide absentee voters sufficient time to
receive and return their ballots. Voters and Election
Officials Frustrated by Tight Timeframes
Page 14 GAO- 01- 704T
final certified slate of candidates and issues. Receipt of advance ballots
in addition to the regular ballot confused some voters we spoke to.
Some states whose primary election schedules do not allow ballots to be
available 30 days before the election extend the deadline for overseas
voters. For example, two of the four states we visited- Florida and Texas-
allow 10 days and 5 days after election day, respectively, for receiving
overseas ballots. While such provisions give more time to absentee voters,
they have also led to administrative requirements, such as postmarking, to
show that ballots are mailed from overseas and on or before election day.
Both state officials and citizens groups we spoke with agreed that these
administrative requirements further complicate the election process. Some
said that it would be best if states and local jurisdictions would send out
ballots at least 30 days prior to the election and have all ballots due on
election day.
While local election officials and absentee voters face time constraints in
executing their parts of the election process, the one area that neither can
control is the transport of the ballot materials and voted ballots through
the mail. Although some military voters voiced concern about postal systems,
our limited review of the military postal system did not identify systemic
problems with the timeliness of mail delivery. Overseas voters who do not
have access to the military postal system may have faced other problems such
as longer transit times and unreliable mail service. For example,
international mail generally takes longer to deliver, particularly to remote
locations, than mail within the United States. Moreover, while some private
mail carriers such as DHL, Inc. transported ballots to the United States
free of charge by air from some overseas locations, not all overseas
citizens had access to such services. Further, even though they originated
from overseas, such ballots were not postmarked until they arrived in the
United States, raising the potential for local jurisdictions in states with
an extended deadline to disqualify them because they lacked an overseas
postmark or bore a postmark dated after election day.
Some military and overseas voters we spoke to also voiced their frustration
about not knowing whether their applications for registration or ballots had
been approved and when they could expect a ballot. Practices on providing
such feedback varied at the 16 counties we visited. Some said they notified
voters using the return post card on the Federal Post Card Application or
other notification; some notified applicants only if there was a problem
with the application; and some considered mailing the ballot as confirmation
that the application was accepted. County officials told us that they did
not always have time to respond to voters Lack of Feedback on
Status of Registration and Ballot Requests Caused Frustration
Page 15 GAO- 01- 704T
whose applications they received close to the deadline, even if there was a
problem.
State and local election officials in the states we visited often used
technology such as faxing and e- mail to alleviate time problems and improve
communications with voters. However, they pointed out the need for security
in the registration and voting process. During the 2000 election, 41 states
allowed voters to fax some election materials- such as ballot requests-
while 9 states did not allow any faxing. Moreover, the Federal Voting
Assistance Program conducted a pilot program on Internet voting in the 2000
general election, working with 4 states (Florida, South Carolina, Texas, and
Utah) and 84 military voters in 12 countries. While the pilot program
demonstrated that it is possible for military voters to cast ballots on line
using digital signatures, security and privacy are issues in significantly
expanding the program in the near term, according to the Federal Voting
Assistance Program?s Director and state officials who participated in the
project.
Technology may be used to increase communication between local jurisdictions
and voters and alleviate some of the timing problems without creating undue
security risks, however. For example, the states we visited have made their
registration applications available on the Internet, and the Federal Voting
Assistance Program?s web site has an electronic version of the Federal Post
Card Application. E- mail is also a way that counties can correspond with
voters, for example, reminding them of upcoming elections and providing
sample ballots before actual ballots are printed. However, the Federal Post
Card Application does not include a space for voters to provide an e- mail
address. Increased Use of
Technology May Improve Communication with Voters and Alleviate Some Time
Concerns, but Security Is an Issue
Page 16 GAO- 01- 704T
Information is not available on the precise number of military and overseas
absentee ballots that were cast nationwide in the November 2000 election,
the number that were disqualified, and the reasons they were disqualified.
11 While some local election officials we have spoken to so far in our
telephone survey could provide this data, others said they did not track
data on these specific groups of absentee voters and could not readily
provide the data. Local election officials we have spoken with told us the
most common reasons for disqualifying absentee ballots are (1) the ballot
arrived after the deadline and (2) the envelope or form accompanying the
ballot was not completed properly.
During our visits to the 16 counties, local election officials provided
examples of various reasons absentee ballots had been disqualified during
the November 2000 election:
Based on data provided by the counties we visited, the largest numbers of
ballots were disqualified because they arrived after the states? specified
deadlines.
Technical problems with the information provided on the ballot envelope
were also cited as common reasons that ballots were disqualified in counties
in all four states we visited. For example, we found instances where
counties rejected ballots that lacked the voter?s signature or the signature
did not match the signature on the application.
Lack of witnesses was cited as a reason for disqualified ballots in
counties we visited in Florida. California, New Jersey, and Texas do not
have a witness requirement.
Some ballots were disqualified because voters were not properly registered
in the county that received the ballot or had not requested an absentee
ballot. For example, one county official noted that some military and
overseas voters sent in Federal Write- In Absentee Ballots without
requesting a regular ballot. States are only required to accept
11 We use the term disqualified ballot to mean those ballots that were not
accepted for counting because they arrived after states? deadlines or did
not meet other administrative requirements (such as requirements for a
signature or witness). We did not obtain information on ballots that may
have been disqualified due to problems discerning voter intent such as
failure to mark a candidate preference or selection of two candidates for
the same office. Precise Information
on Disqualified Absentee Ballots Is Not Available Nationwide
Page 17 GAO- 01- 704T
these write- in ballots for voters who requested an absentee ballot 30 days
before the election and met other conditions.
While late ballots were a problem in the four states we visited, postmarking
could be a consideration in two states- Florida and Texas- that had extended
deadlines. A limited DOD survey of postmarking systems and spot- checks we
conducted at six overseas locations- both of which occurred after the
election- showed that few pieces of first- class military mail lacked
postmarks. 12 Officials in the four Texas counties we visited did not view
postmarking as a major reason why votes were disqualified but could not
provide detailed information on how many ballots were disqualified for this
or other reasons. However, in two of the four Florida counties we visited,
we saw some examples of illegible postmarks and some postmarks dated after
November 7 that served to disqualify votes. In a few cases, ballots came
from overseas voters through means such as diplomatic pouch or private
carrier and were postmarked after election day. Because these ballots had a
domestic postmark, some were disqualified for lacking evidence of coming
from overseas. However, one county told us they accepted these ballots if
they could determine that the ballot originated from an overseas voter, was
in all likelihood mailed on or before November 7, and arrived before the
deadline for overseas ballots.
The federal government, states, and local election jurisdictions have a
shared responsibility to help increase military and overseas voters?
awareness of absentee voting procedures and make the process easier while
protecting its integrity. Opportunities exist for DOD to improve the extent
to which military personnel and overseas citizens are aware of voting
information tools developed by the Federal Voting Assistance Program and to
enhance the amount and quality of voter assistance provided by the services.
Specifically, DOD could substantially improve voting assistance by ensuring
that the services widely disseminate voting information and voting forms and
comply with DOD requirements to (1) appoint and train Voting Assistance
Officers, and (2) evaluate voting assistance programs. Similarly,
opportunities exist for DOD?s Federal Voting Assistance Program to continue
to work with states and local jurisdictions to reduce the potential for
military and overseas voters to
12 We conducted these checks at Ramstein Airbase, Baumholder Military
Community, Mannheim Military Community in Germany; Incirlik Air Base in
Turkey; the U. S. Embassy in Paris, France, and the U. S. Consulate in
Frankfurt, Germany. Observations
Page 18 GAO- 01- 704T
encounter problems in registering, applying for absentee ballots, and
casting their votes. These actions range from encouraging states to change
their laws to make the process less onerous for voters, working with states
and local jurisdictions to allow at least 30 days for sending and returning
ballots, and taking advantage of technology to improve communication with
voters and decrease reliance on traditional mail systems that require longer
transit times. In working with states and local jurisdictions, however, the
federal government should be aware that states must weigh initiatives to
promote ease of voting against other goals such as safeguarding voting
systems against misuse.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes our prepared remarks. As noted, we plan to
issue a more detailed report in September 2001. We will be happy to answer
any questions you or other Members of the Subcommittee may have.
Contact and Acknowledgments
For future questions regarding this testimony, please contact Derek B.
Stewart at (202) 512- 2559. Staff in our Defense Capabilities and Management
team, Applied Research and Methods team, Office of General Counsel, and
Atlanta, Dallas, Los Angeles, Norfolk and San Francisco field offices made
contributions to this testimony. We would like to especially acknowledge the
contributions of Kathleen Joyce, who passed away on April 21, 2001.
(350073)
*** End of document. ***