Editorial: Wrong precinct rule should be changed
Middletown Journal. February 24, 2005.

The importance of provisional ballots couldn?t be clearer after those cast in the Lakota School District were counted Tuesday.

Provisional ballots are provided to voters who have moved and not d their addresses with the board of elections or to voters whose names mistakenly do not appear on election rolls. Provisional ballots were at the center of controversy in Ohio during the November presidential election.

And now provisional ballots have pulled the Lakota district within a mere five votes of winning passage of a disputed school tax issue. After the Feb. 8 election, it appeared the levy had narrowly lost by 29 votes. However, after provisional and absentee ballots were tallied this week, the gap narrowed even further, triggering an automatic recount that school supporters are hoping will reverse the outcome.

Although Sen. John Kerry quickly conceded the Nov. 2 election to President Bush after preliminary vote totals indicated Bush had won swing-state Ohio, confusion and controversy over the Buckeye State?s handling of some 155,000 provisional ballots have continued to fuel reckless speculation about the election?s outcome.

Before the election, Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell had ruled that provisional ballots cast at wrong precincts would not be counted, setting of a flurry of court challenges and rulings. Poll workers were under instructions to direct ?lost? registered voters to the correct precincts, but critics say that directive was not uniformly carried out.

In all, Ohio wound up discarding about 21 percent of the provisional ballots cast, considerably more than the 13 percent thrown out in the 2000 presidential election. However, the Buckeye State discarded fewer than the nationwide 32 percent that were thrown out in the November 2004 election.

The reasons for disqualifying provisional ballots were many, but we do not believe that voting in the wrong precinct should automatically result in a discarded ballot.

Neither does the League of Women Voters.

?We felt strongly that individuals who ended up in their so-called wrong precinct, they should have been able to cast ballots for president and vice president and any statewide offices,? said Kay Maxwell, president of the League of Women Voters, who was among witnesses scheduled to testify Wednesday before the U.S. Election Assistance Committee. Blackwell was also scheduled.

Voters like Laura Bebsz of Garfield Heights, Ohio, should also be heard. After the November election, the Associated Press recounted Bebsz? Election Day nightmare. Bebsz went to a polling place that serves four precincts ? the same church where she had voted for seven years ? and waited in an hourlong line twice, after she was first sent home to get more identification. After waiting a second time, she was told her name wasn?t listed in the voter book. Instead of checking whether she was listed in another precinct book and directed there, workers gave her a provisional ballot. You can probably guess the rest: Her ballot was rejected because she had voted in the wrong precinct.

The issue is at risk of becoming another highly partisan question between Democrats and Republicans. Leaders in both parties, however, are calling for overall improvements to the election process, and uniform standards for counting provisional ballots would be a good place to start.

We strongly believe that as many obstacles as possible should be cleared from voters? paths. Provisional ballots, which Ohio has governed by law since 1994, are a sound method of ensuring so-called ?lost? voters still have a voice on Election Day. Disqualifying otherwise legitimate ballots on county, state and federal races and issues because they were cast in wrong precincts denies citizens their most basic right and ensures we will continue to have disputed election outcomes.