Election reform is expected to streamline ballot access
Americans are in the midst of an unusually heated and high-stakes election season.
That being the case, any changes to how elections are conducted, or overseen, should probably be made deliberately, judiciously and with maximum transparency. None of us are in the mood for greater uncertainty.
With that said, Harris County voters can be reasonably optimistic about the third-largest county’s plans to overhaul elections administration.
The commissioners court voted this month along party lines to create an election administrator’s office. The office will be up and running later this year, assuming a final report on the subject — covering what it would cost and what personnel would be needed — is approved in the coming weeks.
The move drew some pushback from Democrats and Republicans alike, coming as it did with relatively little discussion in the midst of a pandemic and on primary runoff day. It struck some observers as sneaky.
But it’s an important change, says County Com
missioner Rodney Ellis, a Democrat who describes the current system as an antiquated one with a troubling history.
“The current election system in Harris County is a relic of Jim Crow and is as much of an insult to voters as having to walk into a polling center named after Robert E. Lee,” he wrote in a joint op-ed for the Houston Chronicle with U.S. Rep. Al Green, a Democrat who represents the 9th Congressional District.
As it stands, they explain, responsibilities for Harris County’s elections are divided between two offices. The county clerk conducts the elections. The county tax assessor-collector handles voter registration and maintains the voter rolls — a relic of the poll tax days. The former office is currently held by attorney Chris Hollins, who was appointed to the position on an interim basis after Diane Trautman, a Democrat elected in 2018, announced her retirement this spring. The latter office is held by Democrat Ann Harris Bennett, elected in 2016.
We’re all used to that system, but it is a bit strange. Under the new system, both functions would fall under the purview of an elections administrator, who would be appointed by the county election commission.
In a letter to County Judge Lina Hidalgo, the county’s Democratic legislators concurred that the current system is “an outdated relic,” and inefficient.
“Though change can be difficult we are confident that this move to an Elections Administrator is prudent and will strengthen our democracy in Harris County,” they wrote.
Hollins, who is not running for a full term as clerk, supports the proposed change. Bennett has warned that it would necessarily lead to a loss of checks and balances, among other things.
“In counties with election administrators, the lack of accountability between voter registrars and election clerks has caused the type of problem that erodes public trust,” she wrote in a letter to the commissioner’s court earlier this month.
Commissioner Jack Cagle raised similar concerns about checks and balances and accountability.
“I believe in the principle that the people stand before the population,” he said. Both he and Steve Radack, the other Republican on the commissioners court, voted against the changes.
They have a point: the new elections administrator won’t be directly accountable to the electorate in the way that the clerk and tax assessor-collector are. But he or she will still be subject to oversight, via our elected representatives.
And as a practical matter, according to Rice University political scientist Robert M. Stein, it’s a good idea. In a new analysis, he concludes that unifying these functions in the same office would likely enhance ballot access in Harris County, as it has in other jurisdictions across the country.
The difference between an elected and appointed elections administrator, he said, is less consequential than whether the responsibilities for conducting an election are united in one office or divided as they now are. Under the latter system, he explained, problems that arise for any given voter are harder to remediate.
“When you’re running with two different offices, it’s like a bunch of kids playing telephone,” Stein said in an interview Tuesday.
The change may be an overdue one, he explained.
“Sometimes we think we solved the problem by saying you can’t charge the poll tax,” said Stein. “But the institution that separated voting from registration may have had a lasting implication.”