Skip Navigation

Florida Should Avoid Misdeeds of the Past

With Florida’s bad track record on voter purges, state officials must be transparent and accurate in their latest efforts.

May 21, 2012

Flor­ida does not have a good track record with voter purges. In 2000, Flor­id­a’s efforts to purge persons with crim­inal convic­tions from the rolls led to, by conser­vat­ive estim­ates, close to 12,000 eligible voters being removed because the state’s process was so impre­cise that an eligible voter named John Michaels could be confused with an ineligible person named John Michael­son. In 2004, Flor­id­a’s purge had a blatant racial dispar­ity. Now, in 2012, Flor­id­a’s Secret­ary of State recently announced new efforts to purge Flor­id­a’s voter rolls. The initi­at­ive purports to be target­ing non-citizens and deceased persons for removal from the voter rolls, but because Flor­id­a’s past efforts purged eligible voters from the rolls, care­ful scru­tiny is warran­ted to ensure eligible Amer­ic­ans will not be blocked from voting.

Clean voter rolls are very import­ant. We all bene­fit when states under­take respons­ible list main­ten­ance proced­ures. Because the funda­mental right to vote is at stake when voter list cleans­ing efforts are under­taken, the process must be trans­par­ent, accur­ate, and under reas­on­able time frames, espe­cially when the list main­ten­ance effort is of the scale Flor­ida is propos­ing.

Part of the prob­lem with voter purges is that they happen inside someone’s office and outside the public eye. For example, Flor­id­a’s Secret­ary of State Ken Detzner issued a public release announ­cing the purge effort earlier this month, but the initi­at­ive star­ted in early 2011. So far he has only revealed that elec­tion offi­cials are work­ing with the Flor­ida Depart­ment of High­way Safety and Motor Vehicles to cross-refer­ence voters’ inform­a­tion contained in vari­ous data­bases. But the press report does not explain anything more to the public. How can we know the process is being under­taken care­fully? How can a voter incor­rectly removed be put back on the rolls?

This lack of trans­par­ency illus­trates another prob­lem: purges are not always under­taken with the accur­acy and care that is required. For example, to identify deceased persons on the rolls, Flor­ida offi­cials compare voter inform­a­tion with federal Social Secur­ity files. But a simple compar­ison offers insuf­fi­cient protec­tion for voters. The Social Secur­ity Admin­is­tra­tion admits there are errors in its data­base — 14,000 people are improp­erly recor­ded as deceased each year — and typos, bad hand­writ­ing, similar names, and basic stat­ist­ical prin­ciples can lead to mix-ups between eligible and ineligible voters.

Finally, the timing of purges is often a concern, as it is here because Flor­ida will hold elec­tions in just a few months. The risks of error and enorm­ity of consequences make it crit­ical that purges happen well before elec­tions so that mistakes can be caught and correc­ted and voters rein­stated with ample time to cast ballots that will count. There are reports that local elec­tion super­visors share the Bren­nan Center’s concern about the timing of these purges, which are heightened if it is true that super­visors received instruc­tions to begin purging voters from the rolls with only a few months before the elec­tions when state-level offi­cials compiled initial lists more than a year before.

If there are bloated rolls in Flor­ida or any other state, the solu­tion is easy: modern­ize. Paper-based regis­tra­tion systems, in Flor­ida and else­where, are inef­fi­cient, costly, and prone to inac­cur­acy. The Bren­nan Center has proposed model legis­la­tion for voter regis­tra­tion modern­iz­a­tion that would increase the number of eligible voters and restrict ineligible voters with a much higher degree of accur­acy. The proposed system elec­tron­ic­ally trans­fers regis­tra­tion inform­a­tion, enables secure online regis­tra­tion, ensures that a voter’s regis­tra­tion record travels with her when she moves within a state, and creates an oppor­tun­ity at the polls to correct any glitches in the process. Numer­ous states have already adop­ted compon­ents of voter regis­tra­tion modern­iz­a­tion, and Flor­ida should follow suit.

What Flor­ida should NOT do is under­take a hasty and ill-planned purge of its voter rolls.