RONALD D. MICHAELSON contends that:
Executive director of the State Board of Elections, he received a Ph.D in government from Southern Illinois University at Carbondale and is an adjunct assistant professor of public affairs at Sangamon State University. The views he presents here are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of the State Board of Elections.

Board is fulfilling its mandate; accusations of partisanship are grossly overstated

CONTRARY to public belief, the State Board of Elections is alive and well. Only a Cassandra could say that all efforts to create and operate a State Board of Elections in Illinois have been an exercise in futility. Nothing could be more misleading. There is no need to "begin anew," as others are claiming, and to say that "the attempt to establish a State Board of Elections has thus far been unsuccessful," is a reckless statement not based upon fact.

State Board of Elections

It is true that the Illinois Supreme Court decision in Walker v. State Board of Elections means at least a major overhaul (by the General Assembly) in the method used to appoint the members of the board. The revised appointment process will likely produce changes in the membership of the board, even possibly increasing the number of board members, and this conceivably could result in the adoption of new policy directions for the agency. But it is a quantum leap of reason and logic to conclude that we do not already have a fair, effective and nonpartisan State Board of Elections.

Article III, section 5 of the 1970 Illinois Constitution mandates a State Board of Elections that "shall have general supervision over the administration of the registration and election laws throughout the State." The General Assembly subsequently passed enabling legislation which outlined an extensive series of duties and responsibilities for the agency (Illinois Revised Statutes, 1975, Chapter 46, section 1 A-1ff). These powers far exceeded those previously held by the Index Division of the Office of the Secretary of State, since it was clear that there needed to be an aggressive central authority to establish and enforce uniform election practices.

Without question the State Board of Elections has already established an impressive record in carrying forth its mandate. For example, the following accomplishments represent entirely new ground already broken by the agency:

1. Preparation and dissemination of manuals of uniform instructions for judges of elections and handbooks for local election authorities, for all statewide races and most local elections.

2. Establishment of a highly trained field staff to assist local election authorities in the conduct of elections.

3. Promulgation of rules and regulations to insure the uniform interpretation of the State Election Code.

4. Investigation of complaints filed in the course of election proceedings, with reports of possible violations of election laws made to the appropriate law enforcement officials.

5. Adoption of a highly successful voter education program, which uses the "mock election" device to educate Illinois school children, including those at the high school level, on the basics of our electoral process.

6. Administration of the highly important Illinois Campaign Financing Act, which includes adoption of rules and regulations to implement the act, the establishment of public viewing facilities to review reports, workshops to educate the public regarding the content and procedures of this new law, and vigorous efforts (which have proven highly successful) to prompt compliance with the act on the part of all political committees and candidates.

7. Efforts to promote "problem-free" elections in Illinois (many sources labeled the 1976 general election as one of the cleanest and smoothest elections ever held in Illinois).

Although the above list represents only a sampling of what has been accomplished, there are other major initiatives currently in the planning stage:

1. Preparation of a legislative program designed to improve the administration of our election laws.

2. An analysis of the possible application of computers to the entire process of tabulating and certifying the results of elections.

3. Preparation of uniform forms and notices used by local election authorities to insure greater uniformity in the conduct of all local elections.

The point is that the State Board of Elections has been making substantial progress in fulfilling its constitutional and legislative mandate. Certainly there have been growing pains in its early life, but these are only natural in any new department. The agency has stabilized so that it can now claim a measure of pride in its accomplishments during the past three years.

Controversy is bound to develop in the General Assembly over the issue of how to restructure the appointment process. The topic of "elections" has always been a sensitive one for lawmakers and this will prove no exception. Should the governor have sole appointive authority or should the appointments be "shared" in some way by the constitutional officers? Should there be an odd-member board, with the odd-member as the "Independent" with no partisan background or interests (if that is even possible!)? Should board members be allowed to have partisan affiliations, or should they be prohibited from

Continued at top of page 16.

14 / March 1977 / Illinois Issues


Michaelson says Board has established its central authority and legislative struggle to meet court guidelines should not unduly affect ongoing activity of the agency and staff

engaging in any partisan activity (as is the case with all agency employees)? These and other questions form the heart of the issue.

It is arguable, however, that the whole issue of partisanship on the election board has been grossly overstated. A review of the roll calls during the three years of operation shows that very few issues have resulted in a 2-2 Republican versus Democrat deadlock. For example, the lottery procedure (held unconstitutional in Walker v. State Board of Elections) which was authorized by law to break tie votes on the board has been used only five times out of a total of approximately 400 votes taken by the board at its public meetings. And the last time the "tie-breaker" provision was used was back on July 7, 1975, and even that deadlock was not a Republican versus Democrat impasse!

As Justice Underwood pointed out in his dissent on the "tie breaker" ruling, the lottery method of breaking stalemates is not unique to the State Board of Elections, and the majority opinion cited no authority for its ruling. The 1970 Constitution in Article VI, section 3(b), provides a similar method of resolving questions of decennial legislative reapportionment. When the Legislative Redistricting Commission cannot reach agreement, the Supreme Court submits "the names of two persons, not of the same political party, to the Secretary of State," who thereafter "publicly shall draw by random selection the name of one of the two persons to serve as the ninth member of the Commission." This provision, which was upheld in People ex rel Scott v. Grivetti (1971, 50 111. 2d 156) is "indistinguishable from the provision for

16 / March 1977 / Illinois Issues


resolving Board of Election deadlocks .. . ," according to Underwood. The lottery is also used to decide a tie vote in contested elections (Ill. Rev. Stat., 1975, ch. 46, sec. 23—27) and to select persons for military service.

It should be clear that most issues relating to the administration of our election laws and needing board resolution do not have overriding partisan implications. Thus, it is somewhat hollow to contend that only the removal of "partisanship" from the board will "save" the agency. Partisan influences are not predominant anyway. It is also a matter of historical record that efforts to take a governmental agency "out of politics" often lead to a less effective and productive agency (witness the case of the U.S. Postal Service).

It is important that the legislative struggle to meet the guidelines set down by the court does not unduly affect the ongoing activity of the agency and its staff. The State Board of Elections must be supported in its continuing efforts to work toward the cleansing and refining of our electoral process in Illinois. In so doing we will build upon our already strong national reputation as a leader in this field.

17 / March 1977 / Illinois Issues


|Home| |Back to Periodicals Available| |Table of Contents| |Back to Illinois Issues 1977|