RONALD D. MICHAELSON contends that:
Executive director of the State Board
of Elections, he received a Ph.D in
government from Southern Illinois
University at Carbondale and is an
adjunct assistant professor of
public affairs at Sangamon State
University. The views he presents here
are his own and do not necessarily
reflect those of the State Board of Elections.
Board is fulfilling
its mandate; accusations of
partisanship are grossly overstated
CONTRARY to public belief, the State
Board of Elections is alive and well.
Only a Cassandra could say that all
efforts to create and operate a State
Board of Elections in Illinois have been
an exercise in futility. Nothing could be
more misleading. There is no need to
"begin anew," as others are claiming,
and to say that "the attempt to establish
a State Board of Elections has thus far
been unsuccessful," is a reckless statement not based upon fact.
|
|
It is true that the Illinois Supreme
Court decision in Walker v. State Board
of Elections means at least a major
overhaul (by the General Assembly) in
the method used to appoint the members of the board. The revised appointment process will likely produce
changes in the membership of the board,
even possibly increasing the number of
board members, and this conceivably
could result in the adoption of new
policy directions for the agency. But it is
a quantum leap of reason and logic to
conclude that we do not already have a
fair, effective and nonpartisan State
Board of Elections.
Article III, section 5 of the 1970
Illinois Constitution mandates a State
Board of Elections that "shall have
general supervision over the administration of the registration and election laws
throughout the State." The General
Assembly subsequently passed enabling
legislation which outlined an extensive
series of duties and responsibilities for the agency (Illinois Revised Statutes,
1975, Chapter 46, section 1 A-1ff). These
powers far exceeded those previously
held by the Index Division of the Office
of the Secretary of State, since it was
clear that there needed to be an aggressive central authority to establish and
enforce uniform election practices.
Without question the State Board of
Elections has already established an
impressive record in carrying forth its
mandate. For example, the following
accomplishments represent entirely new
ground already broken by the agency:
1. Preparation and dissemination of
manuals of uniform instructions for
judges of elections and handbooks for
local election authorities, for all statewide races and most local elections.
2. Establishment of a highly trained
field staff to assist local election authorities in the conduct of elections.
3. Promulgation of rules and regulations to insure the uniform interpretation of the State Election Code.
4. Investigation of complaints filed in
the course of election proceedings, with
reports of possible violations of election
laws made to the appropriate law
enforcement officials.
5. Adoption of a highly successful
voter education program, which uses
the "mock election" device to educate
Illinois school children, including those
at the high school level, on the basics of
our electoral process.
6. Administration of the highly
important Illinois Campaign Financing
Act, which includes adoption of rules
and regulations to implement the act,
the establishment of public viewing
facilities to review reports, workshops
to educate the public regarding the
content and procedures of this new law,
and vigorous efforts (which have proven
highly successful) to prompt compliance
with the act on the part of all political
committees and candidates.
7. Efforts to promote "problem-free"
elections in Illinois (many sources
labeled the 1976 general election as one
of the cleanest and smoothest elections
ever held in Illinois).
Although the above list represents
only a sampling of what has been
accomplished, there are other major
initiatives currently in the planning
stage:
1. Preparation of a legislative program designed to improve the administration of our election laws.
2. An analysis of the possible application of computers to the entire process
of tabulating and certifying the results
of elections.
3. Preparation of uniform forms and
notices used by local election authorities
to insure greater uniformity in the
conduct of all local elections.
The point is that the State Board of
Elections has been making substantial
progress in fulfilling its constitutional
and legislative mandate. Certainly there
have been growing pains in its early life,
but these are only natural in any new
department. The agency has stabilized
so that it can now claim a measure of
pride in its accomplishments during the
past three years.
Controversy is bound to develop in
the General Assembly over the issue of
how to restructure the appointment
process. The topic of "elections" has
always been a sensitive one for lawmakers and this will prove no exception.
Should the governor have sole appointive authority or should the appointments be "shared" in some way by the
constitutional officers? Should there be
an odd-member board, with the odd-member as the "Independent" with no
partisan background or interests (if that
is even possible!)? Should board members be allowed to have partisan affiliations, or should they be prohibited from
Continued at top of page 16.
14 / March 1977 / Illinois Issues
Michaelson says
Board has established its
central authority and
legislative struggle to meet
court guidelines should not
unduly affect ongoing
activity of the agency
and staff
engaging in any partisan activity (as is
the case with all agency employees)?
These and other questions form the
heart of the issue.
It is arguable, however, that the whole
issue of partisanship on the election
board has been grossly overstated. A
review of the roll calls during the three
years of operation shows that very few
issues have resulted in a 2-2 Republican
versus Democrat deadlock. For example, the lottery procedure (held unconstitutional in Walker v. State Board of
Elections) which was authorized by law
to break tie votes on the board has been
used only five times out of a total of approximately 400 votes taken by the
board at its public meetings. And the
last time the "tie-breaker" provision was
used was back on July 7, 1975, and even
that deadlock was not a Republican
versus Democrat impasse!
As Justice Underwood pointed out in
his dissent on the "tie breaker" ruling,
the lottery method of breaking stalemates is not unique to the State Board of
Elections, and the majority opinion
cited no authority for its ruling. The
1970 Constitution in Article VI, section
3(b), provides a similar method of
resolving questions of decennial legislative reapportionment. When the Legislative Redistricting Commission cannot
reach agreement, the Supreme Court
submits "the names of two persons, not
of the same political party, to the
Secretary of State," who thereafter
"publicly shall draw by random selection the name of one of the two persons
to serve as the ninth member of the
Commission." This provision, which
was upheld in People ex rel Scott v.
Grivetti (1971, 50 111. 2d 156) is "indistinguishable from the provision for
16 / March 1977 / Illinois Issues
resolving Board of Election deadlocks
.. . ," according to Underwood. The
lottery is also used to decide a tie vote in
contested elections (Ill. Rev. Stat., 1975,
ch. 46, sec. 23—27) and to select persons
for military service.
It should be clear that most issues
relating to the administration of our
election laws and needing board resolution do not have overriding partisan
implications. Thus, it is somewhat
hollow to contend that only the removal
of "partisanship" from the board will
"save" the agency. Partisan influences
are not predominant anyway. It is also a
matter of historical record that efforts to
take a governmental agency "out of
politics" often lead to a less effective and
productive agency (witness the case of
the U.S. Postal Service).
It is important that the legislative
struggle to meet the guidelines set down
by the court does not unduly affect the
ongoing activity of the agency and its
staff. The State Board of Elections must
be supported in its continuing efforts to
work toward the cleansing and refining
of our electoral process in Illinois. In so
doing we will build upon our already
strong national reputation as a leader in
this field.
17 / March 1977 / Illinois Issues