• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

State of Elections

William & Mary Law School | Election Law Society

Hide Search

Automatic Registration

D.C. Automatic Voter Registration and Potential Steps Towards Increasing Accessibility in Voting

Election Law Society · March 6, 2023 ·

By Julian Miller

In July 2022, Charles Allen, Councilmember for Ward 6, introduced a new bill. The bill was introduced as the “Automatic Voter Registration Expansion Amendment Act of 2022.” This builds on Allen’s introduction of the Automatic Voter Registration Amendment Act of 2015, which passed unanimously in 2017 (D.C. Law 21-208). This new bill would change automatic voter registration (AVR) from “front-end” opt-out automatic voter registration to “back-end” opt-out automatic voter registration, and it would add any D.C. voter who interacts with source agencies to a “preapproved for registration list.” This change would allow anyone on the “preapproved for registration list” to register to vote by showing up to vote or voting by mail. 

AVR automatically registers eligible individuals to vote when they have had an interaction with certain government agencies, most often the Department of Motor Vehicles. As of recently 12 states have included other government agencies in their AVR policies. 

AVR grew most rapidly out of the passage of the National Voter Registration Act by Congress in 1993. In doing so, the United States took steps towards making the process of registering to vote easier and more accessible by enacting certain voting registration requirements for offering voting registration opportunities at the state level. As of 2022, according to the National Conference of State Legislature, 22 states and Washington, D.C., have enacted some kind of AVR to increase voter registration. 

Front-end opt out AVR allows for an individual at certain government agencies, such as the Department of Motor Vehicles, to register or decline while at the “point of service.” In contrast, back-end opt out AVR, as the name suggests, gives the individual the option to register after “point of service.” Instead, an individual receives a notification that they will be registered to vote after their interaction at the agency. Further, if the individual does not respond to the mail and actively declines registration, the individual is automatically registered. 

In general, and also incredibly important when noting the United States history of voter suppression, AVR has proven to be most beneficial for underrepresented and underserved populations in the United States. In D.C., the recently introduced Automatic Voter Registration Expansion Amendment Act of 2022 focuses on the method in which automatic registration occurs. Charles Allen cites to the fact that Back-end opt-out AVR is seen as superior to front-end AVR by election experts. 

Proponents of the back-end opt-out AVR argue that it is: 1) more effective, 2) more efficient, and 3) more secure than front-end opt-out AVR. First, concerning effectiveness, by comparing states that employ different AVR systems researchers found that back-end opt-out systems of AVR add more voting-eligible individuals to voter rolls when compared to front-end systems. Proponents argue that the multiple steps that back-end systems employ in order to opt out make it more likely that voting-eligible individuals won’t choose to opt out. Second, the back-end opt-out AVR system is more efficient than the front-end system, as those in charge of carrying out the bulk of this registration process are state officials who have been trained and are paid to do so. Proponents argue that taking this pressure off of an individual makes AVR systems more efficient. Along the same lines, proponents argue that the state is better equipped than an individual, when taking into account language and socio-economic barriers, to know whether an individual is eligible for registration. Proponents argue that this makes United States elections more secure as government agencies have the proper toolbox to decide which individuals are eligible to vote and which are not. Therefore, the onus should be on the state to confirm an individual’s eligibility for registration by using the information they have at their disposal. 

Some opposition to AVR in general, and the preferred back-end opt out AVR in particular, is heavily partisan. For instance, those in opposition to AVR feel that its hidden intent is to benefit the Democratic party, based on the idea that individuals who aren’t registered to vote are more likely to vote Democrat. However, a 2022 AVR report by Rachel Funk Fordham found that multiple studies have found that there is no “significant partisan bias” that favors Democrats stemming from state AVR policies. Other opposition to back-end opt-out AVR argues that this could potentially register noncitizens, thereby increasing the likelihood that noncitizens are prosecuted for voter fraud.

If increased registration is what the bill intends to achieve, the empirical data shows that back-end AVR policies increase registration more than front-end policies. For example, a study in 2021 comparing both front-end and back-end AVR policies showed that the latter increased registration by 8.1 percent, as opposed to the former, which increased registration by only 2.9 percent.

The Automatic Voter Registration Expansion Amendment Act introduced in D.C. is a part of a greater effort to introduce voter-friendly legislation, making voting and registration more accessible for constituents in D.C. Most recently, this proposal had a public hearing on September 16, 2022. 

Georgia’s Voter Registration Surge: The Investigations and Lawsuits Behind the Numbers

Election Law Society · January 22, 2020 ·

By: Amber Stapleton

Ahead of the 2020 presidential election, with Georgia expected to be a key political battleground, the state has seen a record number of citizens registered to vote. In the last 11 months alone, more that 352,000 Georgia citizens have been registered to vote and the influx has boosted the state’s voter rolls to the record high of nearly 7.4 million. According to one Atlanta Journal-Constitution article which cited the publications own analysis of registered voters from November 6, 2018 to August 12, 2019, “[a]bout 47% of the new voters who identified their race are minorities and 45% are age 30 or younger.”

[Read more…] about Georgia’s Voter Registration Surge: The Investigations and Lawsuits Behind the Numbers

Driving Up The Numbers: Will California’s Motor Voter Law Dramatically Alter The Golden State’s Electorate?

Election Law Society · November 30, 2016 ·

By: Tyler Sherman

With low voter turnout in the recent 2014 elections, pressure mounted on California legislators to act to increase voter participation. In response, California’s state legislature passed, and Governor Jerry Brown approved, the New Motor Voter Act. In essence, the law will automatically register eligible citizens to vote when they use Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) services, such as obtaining a driver’s license. Slated to go into effect in July of 2017, the law has the potential to dramatically alter the Golden State’s future.

[Read more…] about Driving Up The Numbers: Will California’s Motor Voter Law Dramatically Alter The Golden State’s Electorate?

TX – Fossils Running Amok: Subversion of Democracy by Old Election Machines and Travis County’s Unique Solution

Election Law Society · March 21, 2016 ·

By: Katie Teeters

In September of 2015, the Brennan Center for Justice published a report based on ten months of research, which looked at problems arising from aging voting machines. First, the report found that a majority of election districts in forty-three states are using ten-year old machines. There are fourteen states with machines fifteen-years or older. Considering the rapid pace of technology in the past fifteen years, these election machines are truly relics of the past. To illustrate how ancient these machines are; in 2000 Wikipedia nor iTunes existed. Many of the voting machines have minimal memory, such as in Allen County where the machine’s memory cards can contain only 250 megabytes of data. Samsung’s new basic Galaxy S6 smartphone can hold up to 32 gigabytes of data, which is approximately 128 times more memory than those machines.

[Read more…] about TX – Fossils Running Amok: Subversion of Democracy by Old Election Machines and Travis County’s Unique Solution

Modern Obstacles to Voting: Oregon’s Failed Attempt at Automatic Voter Registration

Election Law Society · November 11, 2013 ·

by Megan Thomas, Contributor

As much as we focus on getting out the vote for each election, the first step in voting usually takes place long before election day. Throughout the United States, citizens must register before they are allowed to vote.  Though some states allow same-day registration, most states require that voters register in advance of an election. Advance registration makes voting a multi-step process and is widely considered to be a barrier to voter access. [Read more…] about Modern Obstacles to Voting: Oregon’s Failed Attempt at Automatic Voter Registration

Primary Sidebar

Pages

  • About Us
  • Election Law Glossary
  • Staff History
  • Links
  • Archived Pages
    • Citizens United + The States
    • Virginia Redistricting Competition

Search

View Posts by State

Archives

Tags

2016 Election 2020 Election Absentee ballots absentee voting Ballot Access ballot initiative Campaign Finance Citizens United Colorado Disenfranchise disenfranchisement Early Voting Election 2016 Electronic Voting Felon Voting Rights First Amendment Gerrymandering in-depth article judicial elections mail-in voting National Voter Registration Act North Carolina photo ID primary election Redistricting Referendum Registration Secretary of State state of elections Supreme Court Texas Virginia Vote by mail Voter Fraud Voter ID Voter Identification voter registration Voter Turnout voting voting and COVID Voting Machines Voting Rights Voting Rights Act VRA William & Mary

Blogroll

  • Election Law Issues
  • William & Mary Law School
  • Williamsburg Redistricting – "The Flat Hat" article

Friends

  • W&M Election Law Program

Contact Information:

To contact us, send an email to
wmstateofelections@gmail.com

Current Editorial Staff

Brendan W. Clark ’24, Editor-in-Chief
Rachel Clyburn ’24, Editor-in-Chief

State of Elections

Copyright © 2023 · Monochrome Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in