Boulder must not limit voter access

As we collectively witness the Supreme Court’s rollback on core protections: abortion, Miranda rights, gun violence prevention, voting and the evaporating line between church and state, it’s important also to look locally and get a lay of the shifting land here in Boulder.

Turns out, a small group of folks in Boulder would like to keep voter access limited by opposing efforts to move local elections to even years, when 40% more voters participate.

But how, you ask? Every registered voter gets a ballot for every election, right? That means it must be “personal choice” in terms of who chooses not to vote, right? Opponents like Bob Yates have even publicly asserted that supporters of moving local elections to even years are after “quantity over quality” of votes. This concept of “quality” votes has been a standard GOP talking point, and Councilmember Yates should define what he means by it.

The truth is: odd-year elections happen under the radar of the average community member’s purview, especially if that person is busy working to make ends meet, struggling with structural barriers caused by racism, or has moved recently.

Add to that, there is no nationwide Get Out The Vote drive for odd-year elections. Media coverage on local elections lives mostly locked behind paywalls, due to continued divestment in local news. And local candidates can’t ride the larger wave of excitement for bigger races up the ballot. When local elections are held in even years, the data shows that more people participate all the way through the ballot, and more votes are cast on local issues, too. Who decides what a “quality” vote is, anyway? In reality, local opposition to increasing voter turnout via evenyear elections isn’t far removed at all from the GOP’S decadeslong push to suppress the vote.

— Katie Farnan, Boulder