Citizens who have registered to vote absentee can start to vote “in person” absentee in Missouri.

There aren’t a lot of Missouri absentee ballots cast–they are an “excuse required” state according to NCSL and according to our figures, 6.2% voted absentee in 2010 and 11% voted absentee in 2008.  We have not collected data on absentee voting in the primary (and can’t find it on Missouri’s website).

Whatever happens in the next few weeks, 630,000 absentee ballots are already in the mail. Rick Perry and Michelle Bachmann are on these ballots.

Orlando Sentinel story: http://bit.ly/sNi2xW

The 2010 Report and datasets have been released by the EAC.

Regardless of what happens to the Election Assistance Commission, I hope Congress continues to require and fund the Election Administration and Voting Survey (as well as the NVRA and UOCAVA surveys.

All three provide invaluable insights into the conduct of American elections voting, the most fundamental act of democracy and citizenship. Without the national perspective provided by these three data reporting instruments, it becomes much more difficult to impossible to monitor, evaluate, and improve the democratic process, whether it be making sure everyone who is eligible has a chance to register; that uniformed personnel and overseas citizens have sufficient time to vote; or that each American citizen, regardless of state, county, or township, has a full and equal right to vote.

The domestic absentee mailing deadline–for many states, not tied to the 45 day window mandated by the MOVE Act for UOCAVA ballots–is starting to impact the presidential race. I’ve argued in the past that states have probably made this change to save money and ease administration, but the domestic absentee ballots could be mailed much closer to the date of the election.

Today’s Richmond Times Dispatch story reports that the deadline for Gingrich to get on the VA ballot is January 21, so that the absentee and the precinct place ballots are identical.  

A recent paper by Marc Meredity and Neil Maholtra in the Election Law Journal (this article has been designated as free content) showed how changes in the list of candidates–mainly candidates who withdraw after absentee ballots are printed and early votes are cast–can substantially alter voter decision making.  I don’t think the authors have thought about the reverse, candidates who may not be on an absentee ballot but do make it onto the polling place ballot!

I just posted about the NDRI newsletter which appeared in my inbox, and thought this fellowship (deadline December 12th unfortunately) may interest some of our international readers:

Call for Applications: Stanford University’s Draper Hills Summer Fellows Program:

Applications are now being accepted for the 2012 Draper Hills Summer Fellows Program at Stanford University. The dates for the 2012 Draper Hills Summer Fellows Program are Sunday, July 22-Friday, August 10, 2012. Applicants are required to participate in the entire duration of the fellowship program. The program is aimed at early to mid-career practitioners who possess 10 to 25 years of professional experience working actively in the field of democracy, development, and the rule of law. Applicants can be working as policymakers, academics, legal professionals, social entrepreneurs, business entrepreneurs, and leaders of civil society organizations (such as representatives of trade unions, nongovernmental organizations, the media, business, and professional associations). In their present capacity, applicants should play important and influential roles in their country’s political, economic, and social development. Participants should have demonstrated professional and personal achievements in a relevant sector of democracy, development, and the rule of law. More information on eligibility requirements and application procedures are available here. Deadline for application is December 12, 2012.

I received a newsletter today that I’ll continue to subscribe to, even though it came to me unsolicited. I’ve never heard of NDRI (Network of Democracy Research Institutes)–and I’d be fascinated to know through which of my professional engagements they found me–but I suspect many of our readers here may also wish to subscribe.

NDRI is a Washington-based “association of organizations that conduct research on democracy, democratization, and related topics in comparative government and international affairs. Included in the Network are independent institutions, university-based study centers, and research programs affiliated with political parties, labor unions, and democracy and human rights movements, and other organizations.” The funding isn’t clear and the “about us” page is frustratingly short. Isn’t it clear that when I get an unsolicited email, I do a little Internet research!

However, the newsletter itself is packed full of useful links, stories, and information. You can see the most recent edition of the newsletter here: http://www.ndri.ned.org/ndri-newsletter.html. The newsletter starts with funding and job opportunities, and them digests recent reports and publications by NDRI member institutions (which constitute a wide swath of NGOs and academic institutes).

I recommend taking a look if you are interested in international democratization efforts or have a regional specialty (the newsletter is organized by region).

UPDATE: I figured it out! The email has a “constant contact” attachment. This is one of those companies I heard about while recently laid up with a back injury. I guess someone somewhere has my Reed email on a democratization list.

A friend send me more details of the FVAP grant program to improve UOCAVA balloting. FVAP’s press releases are here:

http://www.fvap.gov/global/news/nr32-2011.html

http://www.fvap.gov/global/news/nr29-2011.html

As I suspected from the first couple of news stories, the grants focus mainly on developing online systems for registering as a UOCAVA voter, requesting a ballot, and returning that ballot either online, via fax, or through the regular mail. There are a few of the grants that refer to methods to fill out the ballot online which could be interesting.

I was hoping at least one grant might take the leap into an Internet voting experiment. I’ve been one of many who has argued that UOCAVA voting, because of the many technological hurdles, has become the bleeding edge for election technology and administration.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Information on the Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP) state grants program is starting to appear in the media. See this story from the Schenectady Gazette (and my earlier posting from Florida).

I am going to look around to see if we can get a summary of all the funded proposals. Right now, it seems like the thrust of the first two is to improve email transmission and return of absentee ballots.

A proposal in the Maryland state legislature would allow the use of full vote by mail voting for special elections.

Proponents note that the bill could serve as a “pilot” to test the effects of VBM on turnout and on costs, which is a great idea. But if the proponents think they will save money for elections which previously had turnouts from 7-11%, they might want to refer to a report by the DC Board which examined a very similar issue.

I came across two stories about UOCAVA voting in Florida–the state now allows citizens to log on to a secure server, download a ballot, fill it out, and return it by fax or regular mail.

I don’t have much more information about the “federal grant” referred to in this newscast (check out the image on 1:02–stock footage from 2008 showing a McCain poster!) while their print story headline refers to “absentee” voting, not UOCAVA voting.