Power Assist

[previous post in series here]

Florida law requires election officials to “permit . . . only one elector at a time to pass through to vote.” Florida Election Code, Section 101.51(1). An exception is made for voters with special needs: "Any elector applying to vote by reason of blindness, disability, or inability to read or write," may designate “some other person of the elector’s own choice [excepting a voter’s employer or union official] to assist the elector in casting his or her vote.” Id., Section 101.051(1). In that case, “the clerk or one of the inspectors shall require the election requesting experience” to complete a “declaration” of the need for voting assistance and listing the particular voter’s particular disability. Id., Section 101.051(4).

The law is logical and proper. But the second of the two statutes could be fraudulently manipulated. In the guise of giving assistance, a third party could be choosing for a voter, not merely helping. Thursday’s rumor said one woman in Cape Coral had voted for two dozen handicapped people bussed-in to that station. The good news is she hasn’t been back. The bad news is that our Saturday afternoon Cape Coral observer’s gone missing as well.

We pay special attention to those assisting voters. It almost never warrants an objection—husbands and wives; mothers and daughters. A challenge to legitimate voting would provoke bad media coverage. And, of course, the voters could be Republicans. What to do?

The issue is particularly acute at the main Ft. Myers early ballot site, where we can’t observe the voter ID/request for assistance process at all. But we try to monitor regardless. This morning, two voters lingered together in the booth for quite some time. (Florida law gives each voter 5 minutes, which can be extended upon request. Florida Election Code, Section 101.51(2).) Suspiciously, both were young; neither appeared disabled.

Through the local Republican observer, I approached poll workers, who confirmed that the voter requested assistance and signed the declaration form—but wouldn’t permit us to examine the form. Only after the two departed—and the vote already recorded—were we permitted review the declaration—where one voter swore he was “visually impaired.” Hmm. He didn’t appear to require assistance walking. But, might he have been unable to read the fine-print on the ballot? Which would have been embarrassing in a challenge. (Nightmare headline: Lee County Republicans Target Lame, Blind—Plague of Frogs to Follow?—Film at 11) We decided to stay silent.

I’ve alerted county observers (and poll watchers for Tuesday) to limit challenges of “assisted” voters to cases where a single person helps three or more people. Parents, spouse?—fine. A bus-load?—suspicious.

Assistance is ok. Permitting outside agitators to overpower the will of voters isn’t. In practice, the difference is difficult to spot. Which makes my task less black-letter law and more a judgment call. It’s the best we can do.

[Series continues here]