Although the United States prides itself on its commitment to democracy, its electoral system hardly qualifies as world-class. Putting aside the well-documented problems with electronic voting, hanging chads, and inept ballot designs—we are a country that does not even ensure that its polling places have sufficient ballots, adequate staff or enough space to avoid lengthy lines on election day. During this past Democratic primary season, state after state was “surprised” by larger than expected voter turnouts; it was as if the only people who were not aware of heightened interest in the elections were those in charge of ensuring enough ballots. We are now three months from the November elections. Have cash-strapped states further consolidated precincts so as to virtually guarantee long waits to vote? Is anyone ensuring that enough ballots will be printed to address a likely historically large turnout? If past experience is a guide, unless focus is placed on these issues now, expect what happened in Ohio in 2004 to be replicated across the nation this November.

Ignored amidst the Clinton-Obama horserace was the inability of state and local registrars to provide sufficient ballots and polling places despite the clearly foreseeable larger than expected turnout. While it was inspiring to see long lines at the polls, that feeling changes when people start leaving these lines and losing their right to vote because they have to get to work.

For all of the understandable focus on “black box” voting and the technical aspects of voting design, the most easily remedied obstacle to United States elections is the lack of sufficient ballots, polling places, and polling staff. State officials either lack the funds to provide such, or have a political agenda that seeks to discourage voting among certain groups.

Repeating Ohio, 2004

In Ohio in November 2004, these two factors converged to produce an electoral outcome that is still debated to this day. And while most of the focus was on the electronic voting machines and discrepancies between votes reported and ballots cast, less publicized was the undisputed fact that lines to vote were ridiculously long, especially in African-American precincts.

These lines were attributable to three factors, at least two of which will impact elections in many states this November.

First, Ohio’s financial problems led legislatures to save money by consolidating precincts. Since the denser, urban (and heavily Democratic) neighborhoods included the most precincts, these were the areas where most cuts occurred—virtually guaranteeing long election lines.

I have not checked how each state attempted to balanced their declining 2008-09 budgets, but past experience says that consolidating precincts was likely involved. Budget problems have forced such consolidation in San Francisco and throughout California in recent years, though the impact has been mitigated due to the state’s generous laws encouraging absentee voting.

Second, Ken Blackwell, Ohio’s chief election officer in 2004, had a political goal of reducing African-American voting. He was the co-chair of Bush’s campaign, and engaged in systemic efforts to reduce the Democratic vote. There are no doubt other state election chiefs who will do their best to minimize turnout for Barack Obama in November.

The third parallel this November to Ohio in 2004 is the likely record voter turnout. Lines were long in places like Cincinnati’s Over the Rhine neighborhood because the combination of the Kerry campaign and the ACORN “Project Vote” campaign I was affiliated with generated a record high turnout in traditionally low voting precincts.

Are these turnout levels not certain to be exceeded this November? And while Ohio’s new Secretary of State actually encourages voting, won’t the problems of long lines and lack of ballots be repeated unless something is done now?

Print Sufficient Ballots

What innocent explanation can there be in November 2008 for precincts not having enough ballots for all who want to vote?

Is it the “unexpected” number of provisional ballots cast? By this point, we all know that large numbers of people in urban communities change addresses in between elections and may need to cast provisional ballots—so forget this excuse.

Is it the “record” turnout? We already know there will be an unprecedented voter turnout this November—so this excuse won’t fly either.

The best approach is for media outlets, as well as campaigns, and/or legislative bodies, to obtain verified totals right now of the state-by state and city-by-city scheduled number of ballots to be printed. And to then verify at a specified time before the election that the projected number of ballots has been printed.

This seems like a very easy solution to the ballot availability problem. And given how little the printing costs, there is no excuse for any precinct to run out of ballots in November.

Use Sufficient Polling Places

Ensuring sufficient ballots does not change the problem of long lines. This is an offshoot of precinct consolidation, and addressing it requires money for localities and states to fund additional polling places.

If we know now that urban districts have insufficient polling places, could not money be donated to create additional voting sites? It sure would look bad for public officials to turn down such funds, and many owners would likely donate their property for polling use, eliminating that expense.

Again, making believe that the shortage of polling places won’t cause long lines in November is not a sound strategy. Activists/campaigns/legislative bodies should investigate the number of polling places now, and then publicly demand that this number be increased while there is still time to make a difference.

Promote Universal Absentee Voter Laws

It is too late for November, but a federal law requiring states to encourage absentee voting could best avoid the chaos that has come to dominate too many precincts on Election Day. Unlike Californians, who can freely become permanent absentees, states like Ohio, which have terrible problems with lines and ballots, have the greatest barriers to absentee voting.

In Ohio in 2004, absentee voters had to be over 65 or have a medical note from a doctor explaining why they could not vote in person. When you consolidate precincts and then deny absentee voting, long lines that disenfranchise voters are guaranteed.

Expanding absentee voting, like other simple reforms, has been overshadowed by concern with electronic voting. But the ability of states to continue to restrict absentee voting must be preempted through federal legislation.

Perhaps November 2008 will be an election where concerns about ballots and lines were raised early enough to avoid the familiar problems—but absent political intervention, expect the disenfranchisement of primarily low-income minority voters to continue.