Dynamic Early Voting Effects on Public

The idea of voting as far back as the Greeks has always preserved the sense of fairness and justice. In the same manner that the courts enforce strict rules in and around the court proceedings to safeguard how the jury may be influenced, so should a fair election be monitored to preserve the public good by preserving the justice and integrity of the voting process. Therefore, in my opinion, if early voting by proxy vote should take place for the convenience of the public, then this information should only be revealed on election day. The following article by Mary Pat Daviet, a former government attorney, examines the possible effects that early voting may have on the public.

________________________________________________________________

Early Voting Contradicts Constitution

by Mary Pat Daviet, former government attorney
The Tribune

Early voting allows citizens to vote prior to a national election day, in order to increase participation and reduce congestion on election day. As a student of history, I've been troubled for many years that many citizens decide so easily not to vote on election day for reasons of inconvenience. As a student of law, I've been even more concerned for quite some time, though, about whether early voting is even allowed by our Constitution.

In 1845, Congress passed a law setting the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every fourth year as the day to appoint Presidential electors. Later, in 1875, a similar law was passed requiring Congressional elections to be held on that same day in even-numbered years. Today, early voting is practiced in 31 states according to their respective election laws, although Article VI of the U.S. Constitution very clearly invalidates any state law that is contrary to the Constitution or federal law.

Distressing concerns led Congress to consider a uniform day for federal elections. Mass political parties were born in the 1830s, and the electorate was growing rapidly. Concern increased about irregularities in the voting process, and fears arose about manipulation and fraud. For some jurisdictions to vote later than others allowed opportunity for those voting later to improperly influence the outcome. A dishonest official could calculate how many votes were needed to elect his party's candidate, and then stuff the ballot box to ensure the result.

Early voting allows time for corrupt officials to assess incoming results and cheat the process. Even if votes weren't tabulated until polling ended, a more modern type of problem still exists. Today's mass communications allow voters to be influenced by news reports during the polling period. The longer that period is, the less an election serves as a true controlled test of public opinion. Citizens who vote early might do so on the basis of information much different from that known to voters on a later day. If a campaign aggressively influences voters to hurry-up get out and vote early, is it because they want to improve voter participation, or because they're aware of soon-to-be-publicized hurtful information?

Congress enacted a law to mandate one day for federal elections, based on factors that threatened to undermine the election system. Those factors are even more relevant today, and history of the voting-day law and its establishment suggests that today's enthusiasm for early voting is unwise at best. To spread voting over a period of days or weeks increases the very dangers of fraud and manipulation that gave rise to the uniform voting law in the first place.

No one disputes that this country must improve the voting process. Certainly, though, that improvement would come better through improved technology, accountability and educational efforts, than through unreflective and probably illegal legislation, that spreads the national voting process out over an ever-lengthening period of time.

Mary Pat Daviet is a former government attorney, and is currently "retired" as a stay-at-home mom. She received a bachelor of arts in history from the University of Florida in 1981, and a law degree from the University of Denver in 1987.