On June 16, 2010 Kansas had about 126,000 voters with unknown or invalid mailing addresses — the so-called “inactive” voters.

Analysis from past years suggests that less than 1 percent of inactive voters normally vote in an August Primary, but about 10 percent vote in a November General election.  This means that about 100 “inactive” voters may be casting ballots in each state representative election in a November general election but may not live at their last known mailing address in the district.

We asked election officials, Secretary of State candidates and academics for their thoughts about these questions:

• Since Federal law blocks removal of many of these voters for a number of years, what checks and balances might be needed to make sure this isn’t an opportunity for voter fraud?

• How can these voters cast ballots in the correct district elections (like State Representative or State Senate)?

---

Election Officials

Brad Bryant, Chief Election Officer, Kansas Secretary of State

Under Kansas law, the voter decides where his/her residence is for voting purposes. Election officials do not make that determination for them. KSA 25-407 allows each person to choose his/her “place of habitation.”

If an inactive voter attempts to vote at the address where they were registered before being made inactive, the law allows them to do so and does not require the ballot to be provisional. In this case, poll workers have enough information to determine that the person is a registered voter in the election district served by that polling place. If there is a question about the person’s qualifications, they are authorized to make the ballot provisional.

Federal law requires in such cases that the person be allowed to vote upon providing “oral or written affirmation.” Under Kansas law they are signing a declaration on the poll book.

Bill Gale, Sedgwick Country Election Commissioner

Requiring Photo ID to be shown when voting would be one check for fraud opportunities here.

Also, in Sedgwick County we are trying to implement National Change of Address (NCOA) checks on a monthly basis to help us stay more current on our voter list and addresses.

The Kansas Secretary of State’s office has been at the forefront in having multi-state crosschecks done on registered voters.  I would like to see that expanded to even more states and possibly on even looser match criteria to catch more matches.

Don Merriman, Saline County Clerk

Our ELVIS system is a very secure way of stopping voter fraud.

Brian Newby, Johnson County Election Commissioner

I think there is a natural administrative tension between approaches to control potential voter fraud and approaches that might curtail someone’s right to vote.  I believe that nationwide, documented cases where someone’s right to vote was blocked or where someone committed voter fraud are rare, but these are the two sides of the scale to balance.

When it comes to the inactive voters, some of the voters have moved but others may have moved, for instance, and returned, never having registered elsewhere.  So, it seems reasonable that some percentage of inactive voters would present themselves to vote in an election.  If someone came in and impersonated an inactive voter, there is at least some chance that the inactive voter might also come to vote and the voter fraud would be identified.  Since I’ve been here, 2005, we haven’t had a situation of someone coming to vote only to find that someone has voted in his/her place already.

Still, aside from fraud, you could have someone who has moved cast a provisional ballot at a new polling place or even at their current one.  In these cases, their registration is updated, and those races applicable to the voters’ new address are allowed to be counted by state law.  We don’t have any way of verifying that a voter lives at the address stated on the provisional envelope (that goes for all voters when they register).  We do know if the address is a legitimate address, and we do send a confirmation card to the voter.  If the card were to be returned, that would start the process that might make the voter inactive.

You could, potentially, limit what could be counted in such a provisional situation by state law to only those races that are federal or statewide, but the question would be related to how far is the tug on that tension against a voter’s right to vote.  I think it would be a tough sell to say that only some races should be counted and an even tougher sell that no races at all should be counted.

Personally, I think that slack between the two sides, is appropriately taut in Kansas.  I don’t know that when it comes to inactive voters that you could further address one side of scale without creating concerns on the other side.  Voter ID might verify identity, but often it wouldn’t be able to identify the current address of the inactive voter.

---

Secretary of State Candidates

Chris Biggs, D, Junction City  [current Kansas Secretary of State]

We live in a mobile society and state law dictates that it is up to the voter to decide on their place of residency for the purpose of voting. The checks and balances built into the statewide voter file help to ensure that voter fraud in the form of double voting does not occur.

J.R. Claeys, R, Salina

I advocate for registration security that requires proof of identity and residency at the point of registration. However, that doesn’t solve the problem of individuals moving away from Kansas and to a state that does not share voter registration data with Kansas. Kansas will need to be more proactive in working with all states to share registration data so we can remove people who have left Kansas and re-registered in their new state without notifying Kansas of the change. Voter identification procedures, specifically photo identification at the polls, will prevent an individual from voting on behalf of a registered voter who has left and remains on the rolls in Kansas. I’m also concerned that someone who has registered in another state and remains registered in Kansas may vote by advance mail ballot while continuing to vote locally in their new state. The long-term fix is to share registration data with all states and follow through with verifying identity and residency when we find someone registered in two locations.

Elizabeth “Libby” Ensley, R, Topeka [also Shawnee County Election Commissioner]

It takes four years [to get a voter off the list], and that’s why we really need to have voter ID.

Since 1995 when the National Voter Registration Act went into effect in Kansas it is more difficult to get names off the books.  It’s about 7 percent statewide of the names we know for a fact aren’t here anymore — we’ve been notified they’ve moved out of state.  That’s why we really need voter ID.

Kris Kobach, R, Kansas City [also UMKC Constitutional Law Professor]

We absolutely must take steps to prevent inactive voters’ names from being fraudulently voted, such as when a person commits voter fraud by voting the identity of a deceased person.

There are several things that I will do to ensure that this does not happen.  I will make sure that deceased persons are removed from Kansas voter rolls quickly, by cross referencing Kansas voter rolls with Social Security Administration data on deceased persons.  I will also work with neighboring states to quickly remove from Kansas voter rolls individuals who move to another state and register there.  Finally, I will aggressively prosecute voter fraud to deter this lawbreaking that threatens the integrity of our elections.  I am the only candidate who has the law enforcement experience (at the US Department of Justice) to get the job done.

---

Academics

Prof. Joseph Aistrup (K-State)

Are the 126,000 inactive voters an opportunity for fraud?  I suppose that there is an outside possibility, but, an extreme outside possibility.  Let’s just say a bad person got a hold of this list, he or she would still have to find many individuals spread across numerous precincts to walk in to the voting stations and cast fraudulent ballots.  The logistics of this would be enormous.

Prof. Bob Beatty (Washburn)

I guess my question is to what extent systematic voter fraud exists, i.e. voters knowingly voting when they are not allowed to vote? Are county elections officers up in arms about this? How many known cases have there been? How many prosecutions? Also, is it systematic (meaning:

if one person commits knowing voter fraud, obviously not good, but low likelihood of affecting an election; systematic is the old “Chicago” deal of getting lots of people to affect the outcome).

I hear a lot about systematic voter fraud/knowing voter fraud and some anecdotes, but does it actually happen to any degree in Kansas?

Indeed, voting seems to quite the case of federalism; little centralized coordination or uniformity; could be possibility for abuse, but no real indication of systematic abuse. Could be the same cost/benefit calculation that keeps voter turnout low also keeps systematic abuse from happening!

Prof. Chapman Rackaway (Ft. Hays)

There are currently no safeguards I am aware of that prevent those invalid addresses from being used for voter fraud.  Since federal law allows for provisional ballots to be cast, it seems the only method to ensure these are legitimate ballots would be to use the provisional system and verify the ballots post-election.  What you’re pointing out is a massive hole in federal policy and a significant opportunity for fraud.  I concur with your findings about numbers of inactive ballots cast, but in the Secretary of State and Senate races, 1% might just be enough to put one candidate over the top.

---

Related

• Kansas Secretary of State Candidates in Democratic Primary, Kansas Watchdog, July 5, 2010.
• Kansas Secretary of State Candidates in Republican Primary, Kansas Watchdog, June 28, 2010.

• Kansas Driver’s License has enough info to change online voter registration, Kansas Watchdog, July 31, 2010.
• Kansas has almost 116,000 voters with unknown addresses, Kansas Watchdog, Feb. 8, 2010.

---

Contact: Earl F Glynn, earl@kansaswatchdog.org,  KansasWatchdog.org