Alabama: Ed Packard on HB 711
Ed Packard writes on his Election Administration blog that Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) is not the answer to the Justice Department's suit against Alabama over military and civilian overseas absentee voting.
Background: The Justice Department has sued Alabama under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) because, the complaint says, the time between Alabama's first and second primaries is too short to allow many absentee ballots to be sent and returned by civilian and military overseas voters. In response, two bills are working their way through the Alabama Legislature. One would change the date of the runoff (second) primary to allow time for the mail-out and mail-back of the absentee ballots. The House bill (HB 711) will create a ranked-order ballot that will allow the overseas voters to cast one ballot that can be counted twice, if necessary.
[Let me stick in a disclaimer here: I may be indirectly responsible, I think, for the IRV amendment to the original HB 711 (which was to change the date of the second primary). I spoke to House Majority Leader Ken Guin at the beginning of the week about using IRV as a method of saving money and complying with UOCAVA). I mentioned the bill pending in South Carolina and the act already adopted in Arkansas. I think that Guin picked the language out of one of those and offered it as an amendment to HB 711.]
Ed Packard (whom I greatly respect) has three objections to HB 711. First, he says, "HB711 as passed does not do anything to increase the amount of time for this absentee voting period." True, but irrelevant. Since one ballot will be used by the overseas voter to vote in the first and second primaries, the date change is unnecessary.
Second, he says, "HB711's instant runoff provision assists military voters in the runoff election only if they have applied to vote in the primary election." Again this is true, but I thing not very much of a problem. How many absentee voters apply to vote only in the runoff? A very small percentage, I would suggest. (Ed Packard probably has greater access to those figures than I do.) Rather think of it in terms of the overseas voter. If I want to vote by absentee ballot in any election, I have to meet a deadline for getting my ballot in the mail. If I want to vote in the runoff, but not the first primary, then I can do request the special absentee ballot and let it sit in my footlocker till I know who is still in the runoff and vote then. (I don't know why anyone would want to do that.) Even under the mailing time quoted by the Department of Justice in its suit, this would be plenty of time to mail the absentee ballot back to the U.S.
Third, he says, "The violations alleged by DOJ involve citizens who live overseas, not just military personnel." I think Ed just misread the bill. HB 711 refers to "the qualified electors who are overseas citizens and active duty military personnel stationed overseas" as the ones eligible to receive a special absentee ballot.
I hope Ed Packard will take another look at HB 711.