Legislative Alert: Election Support Consolidation and Efficiency Act (H.R. 672)

[Excerpt] I am writing on behalf of the AFL-CIO to urge you to oppose the Election Support Consolidation and Efficiency Act (HR 672), legislation to dismantle the Election Administration Commission (EAC) sixty days after enactment. The work of the EAC aims to ensure the reliability and trustworthiness of our nation\u27s complex and diversified election administration system, and this agency should not be abolished

Ramshackle Federalism: America’s Archaic and Dysfunctional Presidential Election System

Accordingly, this Article proposes five sensible and achievable reforms to modernize the presidential election system. Each requires Congress and the federal government to play a much more proactive role in the presidential election system. The Constitution may be founded on federalist principles, but excessive decentralization is not serving us well in presidential election administration. In an age of tumultuous and accelerating change, the presidential election system must be modernized to meet the needs of twenty-first century America

Current Election Administration Litigation

This briefing paper summarizes election administration litigation that is active or has been settled from January 1, 2006 to the present, excluding campaign finance reform and redistricting litigation.Case subjects include: Voter ID; Felon Voting Rights; Voting Equipment; Database and List Maintenance (Purging); National Voter Registration Act, Section 7 Compliance; Help America Vote Act compliance; Voter Registration; and General Election Administration

A Vote for Clarity: Establishing a Federal Test for Intervention in Election-Related Disputes

Increasingly, state and federal courts are asked to resolve election-related disputes, as candidates are more likely than ever before to challenge some aspect of the administration of an election in court. Election-related litigation puts judges in the unfavorable position of kingmaker, forcing the court, not the people, to determine the winner of an election. When the court intervenes in an election dispute, the public may perceive the court’s intervention as a political act that decreases the legitimacy of the winning candidate and the election system as a whole. Moreover, research reveals that judicial decision-making at both the state and federal levels can be skewed by party loyalty. Typically, election-related lawsuits are brought in state court because election administration is a matter of state and local control. Occasionally, however, federal courts are called to review an election dispute in which a candidate or voters allege that the administration of the election resulted in an infringement of constitutionally protected rights. While nonintervention is the default in federal court, under certain rare circumstances federal courts have determined intervention to be appropriate. The federal judiciary has never, however, clearly established a test for determining when intervention is warranted. This Note explores the federal courts’ reluctance to intervene in election disputes through the lens of a recent Second Circuit decision: Pidot v. New York Board of Elections. Ultimately, this Note concludes that federal courts should adopt an explicit two-part test to determine whether (1) the state corrective procedure adequately protected the constitutional interests of candidates and voters and (2) nonintervention would result in fundamental unfairness to the voters

U.S. Election Assistance Commission Urban-Rural Study: Final Report

In May, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission released a report comparing election administration in urban and rural jurisdictions. The survey uncovered more similarities than differences, in part because many small, urban jurisdictions have more in common with rural offices than with very large metropolitan ones. The size of the registered voter population seemed to influence administration more than did the degree of urbanization.The report was based on a national survey of local election administrators that focused on voter-outreach efforts and office personnel -- topics identified by a working group of election officials and researchers as likely to vary based on a jurisdiction's urbanization

Hispanics and the New Administration: Immigration Slips as a Priority

Presents results of a survey of U.S.- and foreign-born Hispanics/Latinos, by education level and other demographics, on the importance of immigration policy, priorities for the new administration, the Bush administration's legacy, and the 2008 election

The Elections Performance Index 2012: The State of Election Administration and Prospects for the Future

In 2012, The Pew Charitable Trusts unveiled the Elections Performance Index, or EPI, an online tool that provides the first comprehensive assessment of election administration in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.The revised interactive adds data from the 2012 elections and makes it possible for the first time to compare performance across two presidential election years. Users can get the broad national picture by reading the brief here and visit the website for additional fact sheets

In Quest of True Equality: A Study of the Climate for Women at Gettysburg Since 1975

In 2003, the election of Katherine Haley Will as Gettysburg College’s thirteenth president began a new era for women on campus. Will will be the first female president in the history of the college, and her election signifies the tremendous legal and psychological changes that have shaken both the college and the nation over the past quarter century. Federal legislation, the slowly-broadening vision of the school’s administration, and the proactive stance taken by women themselves have contributed to making Gettysburg College a place of seemingly strong gender equality