There’s a bill that was passed by the Indiana legislature this week that would allow counties to establish “vote centers,” reducing the number of precinct-based polling places traditionally available on Election Day. The good news is that any registered voter in the county can vote in any vote center. But scratch the surface, and here comes the bad news. According to the bill, only one vote center need be established for every 10,000 active voters in the county. To say the least, this compares rather unfavorably with the usual polling places, which typically serve a number more like ONE thousand voters than TEN thousand.
It’s not hard to imagine the rationale behind this proposal. With state and local government budgets as tight as they are, what county wouldn’t want to consolidate its election administration activities, trim personnel costs, and reduce the real estate and hardware needed to run an election? But when a “convenience voting” idea comes up, such as this one, they often forget to ask, “Convenient for whom?” While we can sympathize with the financially-strapped election administrators trying to do their jobs, the convenience of voters must be considered paramount.
It only stands to reason that when only one-tenth of the old polling places are available–just to pick a reasonable figure that’s easy to work with–the average voter may have to travel ten times as far to get to a vote center. The suburbanite with a car and a flexible schedule may not be burdened by this proposal, but the voter with a disability and no ready transportation certainly will be.
The vote center bill has passed the Indiana Legislature and is on its way to Governor Mitchell Daniels for his signature. It may be all but inevitable there, but at least two other states (Arizona and Utah) are considering a similar idea. It would be refreshing if the legislators in those states asked themselves who is left behind before they rush to pass bills that are convenient for the government but really inconvenient for voters.