{"id":11970,"date":"2014-10-01T02:18:18","date_gmt":"2014-10-01T06:18:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.commoncause.org\/resources\/did-we-fix-that-evaluating-implementation-of-the-presidential-commission-on-election-administrations-recommendations-in-ten-swing-states\/"},"modified":"2014-10-01T02:18:18","modified_gmt":"2014-10-01T06:18:18","slug":"did-we-fix-that-evaluating-implementation-of-the-presidential-commission-on-election-administrations-recommendations-in-ten-swing-states","status":"publish","type":"resource","link":"https:\/\/www.commoncause.org\/fr\/resources\/did-we-fix-that-evaluating-implementation-of-the-presidential-commission-on-election-administrations-recommendations-in-ten-swing-states\/","title":{"rendered":"Avons-nous r\u00e9gl\u00e9 ce probl\u00e8me ? \u00c9valuation de la mise en \u0153uvre des recommandations de la Commission pr\u00e9sidentielle sur l'administration des \u00e9lections dans dix \u00c9tats cl\u00e9s"},"template":"","class_list":["post-11970","resource","type-resource","status-publish","hentry","resource_type-report"],"acf":{"details":{"summary":"Voting should not be an endurance sport.","featured_image":"","resource_type":150,"authors":null,"related_issues":[110,142,166,167,2066],"related_work":false,"location":46},"sidebar":{"helper_enable_sidebar":false,"helper_media_contact":{"heading":"Media Contact","manually_enter_person":false,"person":null,"name":"","role":"","phone":"","email":""},"helper_links_downloads":{"heading":"Links & Downloads","links":null}},"page_layout":[{"acf_fc_layout":"layout_wysiwyg","_acfe_flexible_toggle":null,"component_wysiwyg":{"content":"The stories flowing into Election Protection\u2019s headquarters on Election Day 2012 were as familiar as they were unfortunate. There were tales of voters waiting in line for as long as seven hours, resources improperly distributed (with thousands of voting machines in storage), poorly trained poll workers, demands for particular forms of government photo identification that many voters lacked, and poll watchers interfering with voters. Some of the longest lines were in precincts in African-American and Latino neighborhoods, with major shortages of voting machines and trained poll workers.\r\n\r\nWhen President Barack Obama took the stage late that night to claim victory, he acknowledged the problems suffered by so many voters across the country. \u201cWhether you voted for the very first time or waited in line for a very long time \u2013 by the way, nous devons r\u00e9parer \u00e7a<\/strong> \u2013 \u2026 you made a difference,\u201d he said.\r\n\r\nA little more than two months later, in the first State of the Union message of his second term, the president announced plans for a nonpartisan commission \u201cto improve the voting experience in America.\u201d Desiline Victor, a 102-year-old woman from Florida who waited three hours to cast her ballot, looked on from the First Lady\u2019s guest box in the House gallery.\r\n\r\nThe Presidential Commission on Election Administration (\u201cthe Commission\u201d) was co-chaired by Robert Bauer and Benjamin Ginsberg, the top attorneys from President Obama\u2019s re-election campaign and that of his opponent, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.\r\n\r\nMembers of the commission included a diverse set of leaders from around the country with election administration expertise and\/or customer service-oriented business expertise. The commission\u2019s charge was limited: to identify best practices in election administration and make recommendations to improve the voting experience. This would include examining methods to lower obstacles to voting for, among others, military and overseas voters, voters with disabilities, and those with limited English proficiency. The commission was not designed to propose any new federal or state legislation.\r\n\r\nIn a six-month stretch, the commission conducted four public hearings in different cities and states, taking testimony from the general public, experts, and academics. Commissioners also attended meetings of community interest groups, and spoke with academics, election administrators, and others at public forums hosted by think tanks and advocacy organizations.\r\n\r\nThe commission\u2019s report, delivered in January 2014, concluded that election administration problems vary from state-to-state and locality-to-locality and that some groups of citizens are more affected than others. The commission made a series of broad-based recommendations to better the experience for American voters. Noting the particular challenges inherent in a system of 8,000 local jurisdictions that administer elections, the commission targeted its recommendations \u201cat common problems shared by all or most jurisdictions. For the most part, they are of a size that should fit all.\u201d\r\n\r\nThe commission\u2019s recommendations are comprehensive, but not exhaustive. There are numerous reforms supported by the voting rights community that the commission left unaddressed because they were outside of the Commission\u2019s limited purview. For example, the commission did not discuss partisan efforts to force voters to show the restrictive types of government-issued photo IDs at the polls that many underrepresented populations lack. Particularly, after the Supreme Court struck down the heart of the Voting Rights Act in Comt\u00e9 de Shelby c. Holder<\/em>, careful vigilance and proactive reform is required to protect our democracy from racial discrimination at the ballot box. Many states have since imposed harsh restrictions and\/or cut back on progressive reforms that specifically affect low-income voters\u2013often people of color, students, and seniors. Much needs to be done across the country to correct these wrongs.\r\n\r\nStill, adoption of the commission\u2019s recommendations will greatly improve the voting experience for millions of Americans. The recommendations are written with election administrators in mind. Many of these suggestions do not require large budgets to implement.\r\n\r\nThis report examines the commission\u2019s core recommendations, reminds election administrators of their importance, and evaluates their implementation (to the extent possible) in states where the 2014 elections are expected to be close, and so might produce a large turnout.\r\n\r\nOur findings are mixed, at best. Some states have adopted policies that address the commission\u2019s recommendations. Others have a long way to go."}},{"acf_fc_layout":"layout_wysiwyg","_acfe_flexible_toggle":null,"component_wysiwyg":{"content":"Rapport complet ici<\/a>"}},{"acf_fc_layout":"layout_wysiwyg","_acfe_flexible_toggle":null,"component_wysiwyg":{"content":"

R\u00c9SULTATS<\/h4>\r\nAucun des \u00c9tats \u00e9tudi\u00e9s n'a pleinement adopt\u00e9 toutes les recommandations de la commission ; il existe une marge de progression importante. Cependant, aucun \u00c9tat n'a non plus compl\u00e8tement ignor\u00e9 toutes les recommandations. De tous les \u00c9tats examin\u00e9s dans ce rapport, les pratiques d'administration \u00e9lectorale du Colorado incluent le plus grand nombre de recommandations de la commission.\r\n