Wisconsin last week became the unlucky test subject for a slew of last-minute election reforms. The state was the first to conduct a major election since stay at home orders have gone into effect across much of the country in response to COVID-19. Despite election administrators’ considerable efforts, the credibility of the election was marred by unprecedented polling place closures, long lines to vote, problems processing absentee ballots, partisan court rulings, and contrary messaging from the governor, courts, and legislature.
States must learn from Wisconsin’s experience and pay close attention to the following issues that will continue to test the legitimacy of elections throughout 2020.
Absentee Ballot Concerns
Wisconsin localities saw astronomically long lines at polling places last Tuesday, in direct contradiction to social distancing guidelines. Both Milwaukee and Green Bay saw wait times of over two hours to vote, and pockets of even longer waits existed throughout the state.
The risk of standing among so many people to vote was particularly acute for high risk groups with comorbidities, and for persons with disabilities who may struggle to stand for long periods of time.
Furthermore, these risks were not equally distributed. BPC’s report on voting lines in 2018 found that communities with a high percentage of minority and low-income voters already wait in much longer lines than others. That was with a full slate of polling places; the problem of long waits is compounded when the mere existence of lines exposes voters to a deadly disease.
The long lines were the result of a shortage of poll workers, which necessitated polling place closures. In the lead up to Election Day, local election officials warned that poll workers feared for their health and would not show up on Election Day. As a result, Milwaukee, which usually has 180 polling places, deployed just five voting centers where any voters in the city could cast their ballot.
Poll worker recruitment will continue to be a problem throughout this election cycle. The Election Assistance Commission found that over 56% of poll workers were over the age of 60 in 2016. Additionally, nearly 65% of jurisdictions have difficulty obtaining sufficient numbers of poll workers under normal circumstances, let alone during a pandemic.
Limited access to polling places and the disproportionate impact on some demographic groups will call into question the legitimacy of this election and others that take place with similar issues during this pandemic.
Wisconsin officials attempted to alleviate pressure at the polls on Election Day by pushing voters to use the state’s no-excuse absentee voting option. Voters responded by applying for absentee ballots in unprecedented numbers. Preliminary totals already show upwards of a 313% increase in absentee ballots returned compared to the 2016 presidential preference primary.
Ramping up absentee voting from a small portion of the ballots cast to the majority of ballots cast in a short timeline is no easy task. First, the tidal wave of absentee ballot requests overwhelmed election officials. Issuing an absentee ballot is time consuming and difficult to automate, and officials lacked the staff to handle a 300% increase in applications, which caused a huge backlog in sending ballots in time for voters to return them by Election Day.
Many voters in line at polling places on Tuesday remarked that they had requested an absentee ballot, but never received it. This was the case for thousands of voters across Wisconsin, and it clearly demonstrates the logistical difficulties of ramping up absentee and voting by mail in a short timeframe.
Second, rules for accepting absentee ballots shifted several times amidst ongoing court action in Wisconsin. These shifts caused the likely disenfranchisement of hundreds, if not thousands, of voters.
The day prior to the scheduled election, Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers (D) signed an executive order declaring the election delayed and all in-person voting suspended. However, mere hours later, the Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed this decision and the following day’s election was back on.
Luckily, Wisconsin Election Commission Administrator and BPC Task Force on Elections member Meagan Wolfe foresaw these back and forth actions and issued a forward-thinking recommendation to all of Wisconsin’s election officials following Gov. Evers’ executive order: continue as if the election is still happening.
The problem was further compounded by additional court action. In a separate suit also occurring in the days before the election, a federal judge ruled that absentee voting should be extended until April 13th and absentee ballots could be submitted without a witness signature. Subsequently, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that all absentee ballots must have the witness signature, and the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion mandating that absentee ballots would be accepted through April 13th only if postmarked by the close of polls on April 7th.
The result of these reversals was additional confusion and the creation of a window in which voters who followed the rules in place at the time risked having their ballots revoked later. Voters who submitted their absentee ballots without a witness signature on the return envelope will not have their ballots counted. Making matters worse, these voters were not eligible to vote in person after the ruling because they had already received absentee ballots, even though those absentee ballots were invalided by the courts’ rulings. Additionally, voters who thought they had until April 13th to vote received their ballots too late to get them postmarked by the close of polls on Election Day.
Moving forward, states should look to Wisconsin with at least one clear takeaway: make all decisions about election administration quickly and finally. Running an election should not be a guessing game about whose policy will ultimately prevail; instead, states must issue clear guidance about their elections if they want them to be perceived as legitimate.
