An Ozaukee County judge ruled today that as many as 230,000 registered voters in Wisconsin must be purged from the voter rolls. State law requires that if reliable information is available that a voter has moved, the voter's registration must be pulled from the rolls within 30 days. The state mailed postcards to 234,000 voters in October who were believed to have moved due to information in the ERIC (Electronic Registration Information Center), representing approximately 7% of the registered voters in the state. The database reflects voters who have changed the address for their drivers license or their postal address. The state Elections Commission has not been convinced that the ERIC data is reliable enough to purge voters within the 30 day time period required in the law, and had postponed removal of the voters until after the 2020 presidential election.
Circuit Judge Paul Malloy decided that this action on the part of the Election Commission was arbitrary and that the voters must be purged within 30 days. The judge also refused to allow the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin to intervene in the case. Both the League of Women Voters and the Election Commission announced that they intend to appeal today's ruling. In the long run this case is almost certain to come before the largely conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court.
Wisconsin continues to allow same-day voter registration, so registered voters who are removed would still be able to re-register at the polls, or on-line before the election. The concern raised is that voters will not know ahead of time that they have been removed, and may not be prepared to register on the day of the election. Earlier purges of the voter rolls in Wisconsin have been problematic, and some voters were removed from the rolls by accident.
State-wide the voters being purged represent approximately 7% of registered voters, but the percentage varies in different parts of the state. Concerns have been raised that since a large percentage of these voters are in the Madison and Milwaukee areas, purging these voters from the rolls may influence the election. Locally, 8.2% of the voters in Dunn County, 9.3% in Eau Claire County, and 5.9% of the voters in Chippewa County have received the mailings.
A statement from the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin is attached.
The League is very disappointed to not have been permitted to join in this case, and we respectfully disagree with the court’s decisions today. Our intention to join the case was to ensure that voters are not removed from the list because of inaccurate and unreliable data, and that unfortunately is what was ordered today,” said Erin Grunze, Executive Director of the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin. “We know Wisconsin can do better by its voters and that all eligible voters should not have to worry about being erroneously removed and having to re-register when they go to vote."
The election commission intends to appeal and stated
We will be analyzing the judge’s oral decision and consulting with the six members of the Wisconsin Elections Commission on next steps. A written order has not been issued yet.
Documents
Memberships
Brennan Center Releases Voter Purging Report, It's Ugly
Download Executive Summary
Download Full Report
Wisconsin is fortunate in that the General Accountability Board has steadfastly refused to prematurely strike voters from its voting rolls, despite the GOP and Attorney General and McCain co-chair J.B. Van Hollen's efforts. In fact, the "Board also decided not to adopt a rule flagging voters on the poll list ...," much less striking a name from the voting rolls.
Writes Myrna Pérez, for the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice on the national report:
Voter registration lists, also called voter rolls, are the gateway to voting. A citizen typically cannot cast a vote that will count unless her name appears on the voter registration rolls. [Wisconsin allows voters to register at the polls.] ... Far too frequently, however, eligible, registered citizens show up to vote and discover their names have been removed from the voter lists. States maintain voter rolls in an inconsistent and unaccountable manner. Officials strike voters from the rolls through a process that is shrouded in secrecy, prone to error, and vulnerable to manipulation.
Voter Purges Findings
- Purges rely on error-ridden lists.
- Voters are purged secretly and without notice.
- Bad 'matching' criteria leaves voters vulnerable to manipulated purges.
- Insufficient oversight leaves voters vulnerable to manipulated purges.
The report also includes Policy Recommendations listed below with text:
Policy Recommendations
No effective national standard governs voter purges; in fact, methods vary from state to state and even from county to county. A voter’s risk of being purged depends in part on where in the state he or she lives. The lack of consistent rules and procedures means that this risk is unpredictable and difficult to guard against. While some variation is inevitable, every American should benefit from basic protections against erroneous purges.
Based on our review of purge practices and statutes in a number of jurisdictions, we make the following policy recommendations to reduce the occurrence of erroneous purges and protect eligible voters from erroneous purges.
A. Transparency and Accountability for Purges
States should:
Develop and publish uniform, non-discriminatory rules for purges.
Provide public notice of an impending purge. Two weeks before any county-wide or state-wide purge, states should announce the purge and explain how it is to be conducted. Individual voters must be notified and given the opportunity to correct any errors or omissions, or demonstrate eligibility before they are stricken from the rolls.
Develop and publish rules for an individual to prevent or remedy her erroneous inclusion in an impending purge. Eligible citizens should have a clear way to restore their names to voter rolls.
Stop using failure to vote as a trigger for a purge. States should send address confirmation notices only when they believe a voter has moved.
Develop directives and criteria with respect to the authority to purge voters. The removal of any record should require authorization by at least two officials.
Preserve purged voter registration records.
Make purge lists publicly available.
B. Strict Criteria for the Development of Purge Lists
States should:
Ensure a high degree of certainty that names on a purge list belong there. Purge lists should be reviewed multiple times to ensure that only ineligible voters are included.
Establish strict criteria for matching voter lists with other sources.
Audit purge source lists. If purge lists are developed by matching names on the voter registration list to names from other sources like criminal conviction lists, the quality and accuracy of the information in these lists should be routinely “audited” or checked.
Monitor duplicate removal procedures. States should implement uniform rules and procedures for eliminating duplicate registrations.
C. “Fail-Safe” Provisions to Protect Voters
States should ensure that:
No voter is turned away from the polls because her name is not found on the voter rolls. Instead, would-be voters should be given provisional ballots, to which they are entitled under the law.
Election workers are given clear instructions and adequate training as to HAVA’s provisional balloting requirements.
D. Universal Voter Registration
States should:
Take the affirmative responsibility to build clean voter rolls consisting of all eligible citizens. Building on other government lists or using other innovative methods, states can make sure that all eligible citizens, and only eligible citizens, are on the voter rolls.
Ensure that voters stay on the voter rolls when they move within the state.
Provide a fail-safe mechanism of Election Day registration for those individuals who are missed or whose names are erroneously purged from the voter rolls.
About the Author
Myrna Pérez is counsel for the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, focusing on a variety of voting rights and election administration issues including the Brennan Center’s efforts to restore the vote to people with felony convictions. Prior to joining the Center, Ms. Pérez was the Civil Rights Fellow at Relman & Dane, a civil rights law firm in Washington, D.C. A graduate of Columbia Law School and the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, Ms. Pérez clerked for the Honorable Anita B. Brody of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and for the Honorable Julio M. Fuentes of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Steve is a member of LION Publishers , the Wisconsin Newspaper Association, the Menomonie Area Chamber of Commerce, the Online News Association, and the Local Media Consortium, and is active in Health Dunn Right.
He has been a computer guy most of his life but has published a political blog, a discussion website, and now Eye On Dunn County.
Add new comment