The Center for Election Confidence (CEC) submitted comments to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) in response to its Notice and Request for Comment regarding draft Election Audit Standards. CEC’s comments stem from its support of policies which increase the confidence, accuracy, and transparency of elections.
Generally, CEC supports the EAC’s proposed Voluntary National Standards for Election Audits and recommends that the standards be formatted instead as guidelines to emphasize their voluntary nature. This style also lends itself well to the EAC’s role serving as a national clearinghouse for election administration best practices.
Key Principles of Well-Executed Election Audits
CEC’s view of well-executed election audits involves adoption of a number of key principles, including:
- Clear communication to voters (and the press) with respect to the goals, capabilities, limitations, and impossibilities of and for any given audit process;
- Understandable procedures with all relevant set before the election; and
- Completion and release of audit results in time for the results to be useful (i.e., before certification deadline and/or before the time to contest an election passes for any audit that may affect the final results).
Proposed Guidelines
Overall, CEC supports the framework established by the draft Voluntary National Standards for Election Audits, which the comments further detail. However, CEC recommends some changes to ensure that each topic and standard is viewed as part of a comprehensive whole such that each topic and standard either explains an issue fully or refers clearly to another topic or guideline that does so.
- Topic: Effective: CEC encourages EAC to consider the audience for each type of audit when describing the Effective topic and its standards. Furthermore, CEC encourages the EAC to be sure to include language describing the importance of detailed public transparency for the goals of an audit, including an audit’s limitations due to legal requirements or prohibitions or inherent limitations due to voter privacy and ballot secrecy rules. CEC also encourages EAC to update language contained within the Effective: Flexibility guideline to emphasize the importance of explaining completely, effectively, and accurately to the general public any required “modifications to standard procedures” because any deviation from procedures established before an election may initially be viewed with suspicion.
- Topic: Secure: CEC encourages EAC to reword its explanation of the Secure: Privacy/Confidentiality guideline to replace “untraceable” with a word that more accurately captures the underlying concept: It is not that a given ballot cannot be tracked through the election but that an individual voter’s specific choices (and the specific ballot that particular voter cast) cannot be identified or recalled once a ballot has been cast.
- Topic: Accountable: CEC commends the EAC for the inclusion of prefatory language in the Accountable topic that sets the focus on voters’ ability to “understand, evaluate, and trust the audit process.” Such a focus on voters’ received perception of election audits and elections overall is an important framing device for any effort to bolster voters’ confidence in elections. Under the Accountable: Public Communication guideline, CEC encourages cross-referencing to other sections where applicable. CEC also recommends changes to the Accountable: Transparency guideline that include adding guidelines for additional discussion of a given audit’s capabilities and strengthen included language with respect to election observation.
Clarity of Sample Language
In general, CEC encourages the EAC to review proposed sample language for clarity and clear communicative intent. The EAC should view the average voter as the intended audience for any proposed sample language to ensure that meaning is conveyed effectively and with minimal opportunity for misunderstanding.
CEC commends EAC for its work to streamline audit operations and to improve usefulness and understanding for voters.