September 28, 2004
Newark – With the October 4 voter registration deadline looming, the New Jersey Citizens’ Coalition for the Implementation of HAVA has serious concerns about the State’s new voter registration form, recently produced by the Attorney General’s office, which contains false and misleading information.
“The new Voter Registration Form is confusing, misleading and hard to follow” said Renée Steinhagen, Executive Director of New Jersey Appleseed. “With dozens of good models of HAVA compliant forms available from other states, you would think New Jersey could come up with something that works for potential voters.”
A voter registration form is one of the most important pieces of paper of any democracy. It is the first point of contact between a citizen who wants to vote and the government. Congress recognized this in its Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002, when it mandated that states update, simplify and ensure statewide uniformity of voter registration forms. It also directed states to maintain a centralized, statewide database of registered voters. HAVA was a direct response to the electoral chaos in Florida and other states in 2000.
New Jersey’s new voter registration process, touted as “quick and simple” by Governor McGreevey and “inclusive . . . and user-friendly” by Attorney General Harvey is neither. The new registration form has fancy graphics that interfere with the printed directions. Marcia Lausen, of the American Institute of Graphic Arts (AIGA), the nation’s oldest and largest graphic arts professional organization, Conducted an Analysis of New Jersey’s form as part of AIGA’s Design for Democracy project. The analysis criticized many aspects of the form’s design, calling it “amateurish” and citing the use of multiple and inappropriate fonts, hard to read type, lack of design strategy, awkward shapes that lack meaning, redundant information, overly complicated procedures and sacrifice of ease of use to achieve an ideal size for mailing. In one section, she writes, “All established principles of information design are violated here . . .”
Of particular concern is question #9, which requests registrants’ driver’s license numbers or the last four digits of their Social Security Numbers. The section is marked with an asterisk that directs registrants to tiny print at the bottom that specifies that one must provide those identification numbers only if registering by mail for the first time in that county and have never voted in a federal election in that county. An initial reading suggests that a driver’s license is required. Citizens without driver’s licenses might put the form down immediately before reading the print at the bottom to see that one can register using many other forms of identification, or wait to show identification at the polls. And, citizens should know that they can register by mail with other forms of ID.
The small print associated with question #9 goes on to state that if registrants do not provide identification with their mailed-in registrations, then they must show identification at the polling place; if they don’t, it says that you “must vote by provisional ballot.” Voters should be informed that they may submit such identification anytime prior to election day, not just with the registration form, and should be encouraged to do so. In addition, there is nowhere on the form a place for the registrant to indicate that he/she does not have a drivers license or social security number so that the State may assign that person an identification number to be used in the newly created data base. The present two-step process commencing with a simple registration form and a follow-up mailed request for voter identification works well as is.
For the first two weeks that the new voter registration form was available online, only the first of two pages were posted, thus leaving out critical information such as the voter registration deadline and a phone number for contact. The form still has not been posted online in Spanish. The Attorney General’s website also lists inaccurate information concerning what kinds of identification are acceptable to present for those who vote for the first time without having provided identification upon submitting by mail their registration forms. While the law indicates that whatever document used must contain an individual’s address, the Attorney General’s website lists store membership IDs as a valid identification. Unfortunately such identification would be rejected at the polls because they lack an address. See http://www.nj.gov/oag/elections/vote_id_req.html.
These kinds of problems are further evidence that the placement of the Division on Elections in the Attorney General’s office – rather than with the Secretary of State, as is the case in most other states - has contributed greatly to New Jersey’s lagging behind in the timeline for and quality of New Jersey’s implementation of the Help America Vote Act. The new voter registration form was issued by the Attorney General’s staff rather than the elections professionals working for the Division on Elections. Indeed, we had reports from one county voter registration official that the counties’ input hadn’t been asked, somewhat surprising given that these staff members deal directly with voter confusion over registration. The new form reflects a failure of process.
“The state should cease circulation of this form until it can be revised” said Steinhagen, “there are ample resources to give input so that the New Jersey has a truly user-friendly form that facilitates voting registration.”