How Early is Too Early – and How Small is "Small"? Georgia Bill Would Shorten Early Voting in Some Localities

[Image courtesy of georgiainfo]

Last week, in response to commentary by two law professors making the “Case Against Early Voting”, I questioned their broad criticism of the practice but also noted that there were issues remaining regarding the conduct of early voting. Specifically, I made the following observation:

There is … a growing realization of the need to do cost-benefit analyses of lengthy voting periods and identify the best time to open the process when significant numbers of voters are ready to take advantage of early voting.

This discussion is playing out in Georgia, where a new bill is opening up the discussion about the timing of early voting. OnlineAthens has more:

The League of Women Voters slammed legislation Tuesday requested by small cities to shorten early-voting periods from 21 days to six, including one Saturday.

Cities complain that staffing three people as poll workers for days when almost no one shows up to vote is too costly for local taxpayers, according to Tom Gehl, a lobbyist for the Georgia Municipal Association.

“The requirement that they stay open can be really expensive, especially with a part-time staff,” he said.

That argument doesn’t wash with Elizabeth Poythress, president of the League of Women Voters of Georgia.

“At what price is it worth disenfranchising eligible Georgians to participate in their own self government?” she asked. “This bill would be a giant step backwards for the election process in Georgia. It is an obvious attempt to limit voting and a clear byproduct of the controversial Supreme Court decision to eliminate prior approval of changes to election laws in Georgia under the Voting Rights Act.”

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last year that Georgia no longer has to seek federal approval before changing its election laws, although those changes still must conform to the federal Voting Rights Act that protects minority voters.

While the proposal is certainly controversial, its sponsor says the aim is simply to save money:

The sponsor of HB 891, Rep. Barry Fleming, R-Harlem, said the intention was simply financial relief.

“It does not change anyone’s ability to vote,” he said, noting there was no objection last fall at a Municipal Association meeting when the early-voting reduction was first mentioned.

The big sticking point is how the measure will define a small city for purposes of limiting early voting:

The measure doesn’t allow larger cities like Savannah or Atlanta to voluntarily hold longer periods of early voting. Gehl said such an option might be difficult to write into law.

The bill would not affect Athens, Augusta, Columbus and the state’s other consolidated cities, which can opt to be considered counties for election purposes.

On one hand, allowing truly small cities the option to tailor early voting to their local resources and demand would appear to make sense. The fight, obviously, will be how to draft such a limitation in a way that larger cities – which share the formal structure but not the profile of their smaller counterparts – aren’t swept in as well.

There is a lot to this story – big vs. little, cost-saving vs. access to the ballot and the aftermath of the Voting Rights Act – which makes it a fascinating story to watch.

Stay tuned, y’all.