Archive for 2014

Florida’s latest election policy dispute involves vote by mail dropboxes in Pinellas County, which the supervisor says her voters prefer but which some policymakers are concerned is negatively affecting the voting process for voters.

The DOJ’s fiscal year 2015 budget request includes funds for dramatically expanded resources as the agency prepares to enforce voting rights in the new post-preclearance environment in the wake of last year’s Shelby County case.

A federal judge has handed Kansas and Arizona a victory in their fight to include proof-of-citizenship requirements on the federal voter registration form. It’s a decision that will almost certainly generate appeals and controversy in the coming year.

Alabama is moving forward on eliminating the outdated – and costly – requirement to print voter registration lists in the newspaper. Everyone seems to agree it’s a good idea – except newspapers, who will lose significant revenue.

Mississippi is upping the ante on outreach to voters without voter ID by offering free rides to obtain an ID at the state’s expense. It’s a vivid reminder of how far the implementation of ID has evolved in the last few years.

This week’s electionlineWeekly examines a new effort in South Dakota to allow military voters to access their ballots remotely in a fraction of the time it usually takes.

Indiana’s new testing and certification program for e-pollbooks is delaying election preparations in one county – and the clerk is getting nervous about what it’s doing to her readiness (and her budget).

South Carolina’s legislature is moving a bill that would provide state funding for the Palmetto State’s early presidential primary after confusion about who pays led to a lawsuit by counties in 2012.

Colorado counties are now working to ensure that every voter has a polling place of some kind within minutes of home. What does this mean for election administration – and what might it do to election costs?

A forthcoming law review article by Kentucky law professor Josh Douglas says that the U.S. Supreme Court is treating federal and state laws differently, to the detriment of voting rights. He proposes a greater attention to evidence in determining when any election law goes too far.