Minnesota’s Elections — Transparent, Verifiable, and Accurate

Today, Citizens for Election Integrity Minnesota and Common Cause Minnesota releases a report that refutes erroneous claims about the 2008 US Senate recount and Minnesota’s election law and practice, made by the Center of the American Experiment.

Read our report here.

The Center of the American Experiment (CAE) proposes that – significant changes are needed in Minnesota‘s election systems. However, the CAE report provides no documentation to back up its claims and, upon close scrutiny, its claims are found to be highly inaccurate and misleading, which calls into question its conclusions and recommendations. We have seen the report‘s so-called “facts” as well as its recommendations in opinion pieces in newspapers across Minnesota. One example of a “fact” is its claim that the rejection rate for military absentee voters was16 times greater than regular absentee voters, when in fact it was double. In addition, the military absentee rejection rate was cut in half between 2006 and 2008 and further improvements have already been made. Since its “facts” have been published throughout Minnesota, we hope that our response will also be published to set the record straight.

The following three recommendations, discussed throughout our response are key changes that will insure the integrity of elections while not creating undue barriers to voters. We hope the legislature will pass them and that the Governor will sign them into law this year.

1. Streamline the absentee ballot process including the creation of absentee ballot boards.

2. Allow for early voting which would provide voters the same rights and privileges that voters have on Election Day.

3. Move the primary election date, which would allow overseas voters adequate time to complete and mail ballots back to the United States.

At the foundation of our election system are and should be standards for fair, transparent, accurate, and verifiable elections. Common Cause Minnesota and Citizens for Election Integrity Minnesota hold these same standards to our work and to our reporting. We understand the importance of monitoring, evaluating, and improving our election system which is why we have provided careful documentation in our response. We disagree strongly with the report produced by CAE and believe the preponderance of evidence supports our conclusion that Minnesota‘s elections are transparent, verifiable, and accurate — and are, indeed, a national model.