The election process in Arkansas is far from perfect. Just consider some of the long lines voters have occasionally faced in some counties. Those can discourage voting, which is the last result any election commissioner should ever want. Most of the problems we’ve witnessed over the years has to do with the speed of tabulations, not the validity of the outcome. Those who have pushed for so in Arkansas have not been able to effectively demonstrate the problems they attempt to solve. Their claims of election problems or outright fraud, to hear them speak, are simply self-evident truths.
Have there been attempts at election fraud? Yes, indeed. The highest-profile election fraud case in recent time involved Democrats in Crittenden County. The case involved bribery and destruction of absentee ballots on which votes were cast for the wrong candidate in a Democratic primary. It was an external conspiracy to deliver tainted ballots to the election process, not one involving corrupt election officials or practices.
State Sen. Bryan King, a Republican from Green Forest, nonetheless came to this year’s General Assembly locked and loaded with conjured notions about how to reform the state’s election system. He reminded us of the popularity of candidates promising to cut the “fat” out of government budgets. Most candidates we’ve heard say that haven’t been able to identify a specific dollar they consider wasted, but they know it’s there.
Truth be told, one could make a strong argument the state doesn’t have an election system, per se. Rather, it has 75 counties with their own equipment and ways of doing things, all guided by state laws but implemented by two election commissioners from the majority party and one from the minority party. That’s determined by which party holds the state’s top constitutional offices. For now, that’s Democrats, but only by one oft ce.
But King and our Arkansas Legislature saw fi t to press and pass reforms to the state’s election process that were neither necessary nor properly evaluated as to their efficacy.
Among the bills were:
Senate Bill 719, which would create a Voter Integrity Unit under Secretary of State Mark Martin, a Republican.
Senate Bill 720 to authorize the state Board of Election Commissioners to remove a county board of election commissioner under certain conditions.
Senate Bill 721 to terminate the six appointed members of the seven-member Board of Election Commissioners, effective July 1, and expand the board from seven members to nine.
Gov. Mike Beebe, by his veto, rightly fended off this conglomeration of election system modifications — we won’t say reforms, because that assumes they would have resulted in positive change. And an assumption is all these laws passed on.
Let’s just remind everyone of Rep. King’s comment when he was questioned about whether Secretary of State Mark Martin, whose office would gain significant powers through these bills, is a partisan: “No, it’s not a partisan position. That’s totally inaccurate. Elected officials are not partisan. We do bipartisan things all the time in voting on different bills. Mark Martin was elected by the people; he wasn’t elected by the Republican Party.”
While the latter may be true, it’s ludicrous to suggest a Republican or a Democrat who gets elected suddenly becomes a bastion of neutrality. If that were true, what’s the point of parties to begin with?
Advocates for election system changes need to prove the problems before setting forth solutions.