This year, Connecticut became the 47th state to introduce early voting, marking a significant milestone in the state’s democratic process. But recently, Secretary of the State Stephanie Thomas and local elections officials have thrown cold water on the initiative even though the long-overdue electoral reform is still in its infancy.
As the state continues to roll out early voting, it’s important to approach it with caution and patience. Hence, elections officials need to take a deep breath before jumping to conclusions as to whether the early-voting period that was approved by the General Assembly is too long, as many have suggested.
So far, early voting has been used in two vastly underfunded and noncompetitive elections: the March presidential primary (in which the outcomes were preordained) and the August state primary whose main event was a race between two largely unknown Republican candidates for the U.S. Senate.
Yes, the number of citizens who voted early was infinitesimal by common-sense standards. But so was the overall turnout.
Yet Thomas said in an August interview: “I think we may have too many days of early voting. And I think like most legislation, sometimes you learn some things after it passes.”
What have we learned? For starters, we learned that voters were not interested in streaming to the polls for two inconsequential primaries. We also learned that the amount of money that the legislature appropriated for this new endeavor was far less than what is needed to keep the polls open for four days prior to the presidential primary, seven days before the August primary, and 14 days before the November general election.
Poll workers are paid, though it’s a pittance. They are also fed, typically pizza and grinders. And the lights must be kept on as well as the heat and air conditioning. Thus, the costs can add up. To help cities and towns pay the bills, lawmakers decided to give them each $10,500, which probably covered the cost of the pizza and grinders. When the legislature discovered some unspent money lying around, it earmarked another $1 million for early voting, a laughably trivial amount.
Thus, this laudable enhancement of voter access and participation basically amounted to an unfunded mandate on the state’s 169 municipalities, and most – if not all – have already depleted their election budgets.
Because this is the first year that early voting is being utilized, many residents are unaware that it even exists. Thomas asked the legislature for $2.5 million to mount a public education campaign and for fraud prevention. Her plea fell on deaf ears.
In that same interview, Thomas affirmed “a direct correlation to the amount of advertising and the amount of early voters,” based on data from other states. “So [low turnout numbers] come as no surprise, absent a coordinated statewide campaign. A lot of people just anecdotally, when I travel around speaking with audiences, don’t know that early voting exists in Connecticut.”
Early voting is more than just a convenience; it’s a crucial tool for expanding access to the electoral process. In today’s fast-paced world, many people struggle to find the time to vote on a single designated day. This is especially true for those working multiple jobs, single parents or individuals with mobility challenges. Acknowledging that reality, voters in some states began casting their ballots in mid-September.
A more accurate assessment of early voting in Connecticut will come in November, when turnout in the emotionally charged presidential election is anticipated to be super high. When Donald Trump was the GOP nominee in 2016 and 2020, 1.6 million and 1.8 million state voters turned out, respectively. The Trump v. Kamala Harris slugfest is likely to produce similar numbers.
Early voting is a promising initiative with the potential to make voting easier and more accessible for all eligible voters. However, for it to be successful, it must be given a fair chance, with appropriate funding and support from the legislature. It’s crucial to reserve judgment on this electoral reform until after the general election in November, when its impact can be more accurately measured.
Michele Jacklin is a member of the advisory board of Common Cause CT.