The U.S. is the only democracy in the world to select most senior election officials through partisan elections, a system that inevitably creates strong allegiances between officials and political parties they must oversee. Secretaries of state, county clerks, and other election officials have generally risen above the partisan affiliations attached to their names to oversee elections fairly and impartially, voluntarily adhering to norms of ethical behavior. But norms are not laws. Less ethical newcomers to the field are winning election posts and effectively promising voters to help their side win. This new reality, coupled with diminishing trust in elections by some voters, points to the need for reforms that enshrine the standards of professionalism and impartiality we all expect in the heart of our democracy. ERN has led the development of ethics legislation and fresh models for broadly representative election leadership, drawn from worldwide best practices, in this new era of American elections.
Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson has published a precedent-setting firewall policy establishing clear steps to reduce potential conflicts of interest while she campaigns for governor
Utah's SB 194 mandates conflict of interest avoidance for election chief, neutrality for county clerks, to improve transparency and public confidence
In 33 states, the chief election official position is held by the secretary of state (or other state officer) who is elected in partisan elections and takes office with allegiance to a political party. No other democracy in the world selects its most senior election officials this way.
Local election officials (LEOs) are the frontline administrators of American democracy. Increasing challenges to public confidence in elections emphasize the importance of structural reforms to support the officials charged with impartially running our elections.
Election officials need support navigating the ethical dilemmas that arise in the course of their duties. This training provides hands-on, scenario-based guidance to help the election workforce meet the challenges arising in our highly polarized political environment.
Although most secretaries of state perform exemplary public service, party allegiances built into these positions make the United States a global outlier in election administration and create risks that need to be addressed.
ERN has designed a new, broadly representative state election board that will have authority over ballot initiatives, set election policy in line with state law, certify results, and nominate a nonpartisan professional chief election official.
An example of a possible bill to secure trusted and impartial elections by providing for oversight by an independent state board of elections and election administration by a nonpartisan professional.
Voters pay more attention to election administration today that perhaps ever before. Recusal options should be available for election officials, and decisions about recusal – even when those decisions are not to recuse – should be made public in advance of the election.
Few states have laws and guidelines for such an apparent conflict of interest. ERN's new report provides a framework for decision-making and legislation.
States have many different models for running elections. This short guide (with map) breaks down where elections are run by an individual (such as a Secretary of State), a board or commission, or a combination of the two.
As a result of the decentralized nature of elections in the United States, election administration structures vary greatly state-by-state. In ten states the state-level leadership is the responsibility of an election board or commission. These types of boards, if structured correctly, can reduce concerns about partisanship in election certification processes.
