VRE State-Based—Wisconsin
No Match, No Vote
On August 27, the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board rejected a flawed proposal that would have forced all un-matched voters to cast provisional ballots. The Brennan Center and Ohio State Law Professor Daniel Tokaji submitted a joint letter to the GAB explaining the rules were not required by HAVA and could result in a significant number of voters having their votes not counted. The Wisconsin Attorney General eventually filed a complaint in court on September 10, 2008. Incorporating numerous arguments made in the Brennan Center’s amicus brief, a judge dismissed all the claims brought by Van Hollen on October 23, 2008. Van Hollen dropped an appeal to the dismissal.
In detail – In July the GAB considered and rejected a proposed amendment to its administrative rules that would have required all voters without a successfully completed "HAVA match" to vote provisional ballots if they did not present proof of residence at the polls. These provisional ballots would have been counted only if they presented proof of residence to election officials by 4:00 p.m. on the day following the election. The rules would have been applied to all voters, not just first-time, mail-in registrants.
But after tales of voter fraud and illegal registration surfaced, the GAB decided to reconsider a "no match, no vote" proposal in late August.
Dated August 25, the Brennan Center and Ohio State Law Professor Daniel Tokaji submitted a joint letter to the GAB explaining that the proposed rules were not required by HAVA and could result in a significant number of Wisconsin voters having their votes not counted in November—one in five by some reports. The motion to approve the rule changes was ultimately withdrawn. And so for now the rules will not be enforced in the upcoming 2008 elections. Nonetheless, it is an issue that we will continue to track especially since the GAB is likely to revisit it after the elections. Similar proposals may also arise in other states.
On September 10, 2008, the Wisconsin Attorney General, J.B. Van Hollen, eventually filed a complaint in court claiming the GAB was violating HAVA. On October 6, 2008, the Brennan Center and a coalition of other voting rights groups (the "amici") filed an amicus brief in support of the GAB's motion to dismiss. Incorporating numerous arguments made in the Brennan Center’s amicus brief, on October 23, 2008, Judge Maryann Sumi dismissed all claims brought by Van Hollen.
Van Hollen immediately stated that he would appeal the dismissal order. Before any meaningful actions had been taken on appeal, however, he reversed course and dropped the appeal after the GAB implemented a policy that would conduct certain retroactive matching, while protecting Wisconsin’s voters from disenfranchisement by typo.
Additional information on Van Hollen v. Government Accountability Board can be found on the case page by clicking here.
Selected Press
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on the July delay (7/19/2008)
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on 22% mismatch rate in voter registrations (8/27/2008)
WISC.TV on the August 27 refusal (8/27/2008)
Blog Posts
Adam Skaggs "No Match, No Vote, Take Two" (8/27/2008)
Adam Skaggs "Correct, by the Slimmest of Margins" (8/28/2008)