Voter registration costs

The main issues regarding voter registration costs have to do with the type of registration system (permanent versus ad hoc, automatic versus show-up update); institutional locus responsible for voter registration (the EMB or a separate agency); and degree of resilience in cost assessment (easily identifiable versus diffuse costs). The following conceptual considerations, which are likely to be relevant to a correct assessment of voter registration costs, are excerpted from a UNDP assessment mission in Cambodia in August 2004.

For more information covered in this section, see:

• General considerations on the purpose of voter list in comparison with other registries of people
• Voter registration systems in a global perspective
• Quality standards of voter lists
  
• Managing the cost of voter/civil registries: Country Experiences

General considerations on the purpose of voter lists in comparison with other registries of people

Voter lists are meant for the exclusive purpose of recording the enfranchisement of voters and facilitating the voting operation by which the citizens eligible to vote (with given age and legal conditions) exercise their right to suffrage on a periodic basis. Voter lists are the tangible proof of enfranchisement, and the quality of such lists is to be judged according to their capacity to serve that specific purpose.

Other registries of people exist and are meant to achieve different purposes: civil registries, lists of residents, and different personal identification documents (i.e., identity cards, passports and driver licenses). The number of registries and the institutional locations of each registry vary from country to country, depending on historical and legal traditions.

Civil registries, which are usually based at local government levels, serve the purpose of recording and certifying births, deaths and marital status. Certification by civil registry is the main proof of citizenship, which in turn is generally based on nationality. Civil registries also offer proof of age—and both citizenship and age are the fundamental requirements for voter enfranchisement. Other lists are compiled Voter lists should not be considered per se as registries of citizens or of residents. Voter lists are intended neither to help with the identification of citizens, nor (even less so) to serve as a resource for the quantification of the population of a given country. Voter lists essentially exist for the purpose of allowing individual voters to vote only within a given constituency and at a given polling station.

In the production and maintenance of voter lists, the kind of links to be expected between voter lists and other types of registries basically depends upon two factors. One is the legal administrative tradition of a given country. The other refers to the special circumstances under which voter registration is organized, most frequently in the case of emerging democracies and post-conflict situations. In the latter case, problems stemming from a deficit of population statistics, civil registries and citizen identification, as well as significant displaced populations, may strongly influence the procedures whereby voters are registered. In general, the main link between voter lists and civil registries is the requirement of a birth certificate as proof of citizenship (which is normally defined by nationality) and, at least in the first instance, a proof of residency (which would normally be required for the allocation of individual voters to constituencies, polling centers, and polling stations). Voter lists and personal identification documents are linked by the necessity for the voter to be identified at the ballot box. Finally, the link of voter lists with population censuses can be found in the facilitating role of census data for the organization of early voter registration, and the disaggregating of voter lists into constituencies. Also, population statistics may be crosschecked with voter lists to assess the size or age of segments of the population that will be eligible for enfranchisement at the present time or in the future. Or provide citizens or residents in a country with certain personal documents, such as national identity cards, passports or driver licenses. These activities are frequently undertaken by some branch of the security administration, normally the national police, and these documents exist for the purpose of personal individual identification. A third type of registry is a list of residents, which may be compiled, maintained and updated by local authorities in the districts of large cities, townships, communes or villages. These lists may serve different purposes normally related to the delivery of public services at the local level, and to provide information to higher levels of government for their respective action (i.e., correcting or updating other lists of citizens on which residence information is required, like the voter lists). Finally, another kind of documentary record is the population census, which is usually compiled every 10 years for the production of aggregate statistics of the population at different territorial levels of a country. Aggregate census information (but not data on individual persons) has many different uses, including the definition of electoral constituencies, which may be based on population, and the allocation of parliamentary or local council seats to constituencies according to population.

Next: Voter registration systems in a global perspective

Voter registration systems in a global perspective

Voter registration can be conducted on an ad hoc basis only for a specific election or organized on a permanent basis either with periodic updating or with updating as a more continuous process. Ad hoc registration occurs least frequently, with the exception of post-conflict elections, which are often conducted with an ad hoc registry of voters. Nevertheless, there are exceptional cases even in well-established democracies where a permanent voter registry was instituted only recently (i.e., Canada in 1997).

In addition, voter registration may be compulsory or voluntary for citizens. A global survey of 124 countries by International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) found that compulsory voter registration is quite common in Western Europe as well as in Central and Eastern Europe. In those nations, it is organized on a continuous basis whereby the voter is automatically registered on a voter list after turning 18 years of age, with no requirement to appear before any public authority. This system is based on individual citizenship and age information, provided from either civil registry records or residents’ rolls compiled at local government levels.

Compulsory registration is not widely practiced in Africa or North America. In South America, the two practices are evenly distributed. Again, much depends on the way civil registries and residence records are organized.

Permanent voter registers are updated either on a continuous basis or at specific time intervals, normally during the period immediately preceding an election. Continuous registration requires an appropriate infrastructure to maintain the register either at the electoral administration or at the civil register. This involves adding the names and other relevant information for those who satisfy eligibility requirements (attaining citizenship, satisfying residency requirements, and attaining voting age) and deleting the names of those who no longer meet the eligibility requirements (usually because of death and change of residency). Continuous registers are used more often than periodic registers in all regions of the world, despite the complex machinery and high cost incurred. It is important to note, however that voter registration through a periodic voter register is ultimately a more expensive operation than maintaining a continuous register (IDEA, 2002, p. 30).

Next: Quality standards of voter lists

Quality standards of voter lists

Democracy means rule by the people, and the purpose of a voter list is to register the people who are eligible to exercise the right to vote. The following standards of democratic quality are particularly relevant:

• Inclusion of all eligible voters. Any discrimination against individuals who are perceived to be political opponents should be avoided, and special sensitivity should be applied regarding certain sectors of the population that tend to be more vulnerable to disenfranchisement (e.g., women, rural residents, illiterate individuals and ethnic minorities). Comprehensive and accurate voter registers should be considered a prerequisite for free and fair elections (IDEA 2002, p. 33).
• Facilitation of the voting operation. In structuring voter registries, the fundamental guiding principles are simplicity of procedures and convenience for the citizen. Because the exercise of a fundamental right is at stake, governmental and administrative authorities must not hinder the exercise of that right or obstruct election-related authorities. Simple administrative procedures must be put in place, and the process for registering must be made as convenient as possible, for example by reducing the need to travel long distances and eliminating payment of heavy fees on stamps and photographs or having to appear several times at registration centers (IDEA 2002, p. 25). This democracy standard requires that, independently of how the list of voters is produced (for only one election or as a permanent or continuous register), the voter lists must be publicly exposed for a given period of time for additions, corrections or deletions on the initiative of citizens.

There are also standards of technical efficacy such as the following:

• Accessibility to eligible voters (this should be considered a technical as much as a democracy standard);
• Ease of use on polling day. This refers to the way in which the voter rolls are disaggregated by polling center and the ability of voters to find their names on the appropriate voter list;
• Updated lists either periodically or on a continuous basis; and
• A clean registry, which should discourage double voting and help produce accurate electoral statistics. The main issues here are procedures for the deletion of the deceased, the inclusion of changes of residence so that voters are registered in the constituency where they live, and cross-checking to eliminate multiple registrations of the same individual.

Since the achievement of absolute perfection in almost any ongoing population record is unlikely, the main guiding principle for voter rolls, according to IDEA, is that enrollment procedures:

 “need to strike the right balance between the need to be rigorous to ensure integrity of the rolls, and the need for flexibility to ensure that people’s rights to enroll and vote are protected.” (IDEA, 2002, p. 34).

Next: Managing the cost of voter/civil registries: Country Experiences

Managing the cost of voter/civil registries: Country Experiences

In Australia, voter lists are automatically updated with civil registry information. The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) divisional staff continually process enrollment information and enter it into the computerized Roll Management System (RMANS) in order to ensure an accurate and up-to-date electoral roll. This includes information about newly eligible persons, electors changing addresses, and deletions of electors who have left their enrolled addresses or died. The staff also process information received from Continuous Roll Update (CRU) activities and elections. Data matching programs undertaken in conjunction with other Commonwealth, state and territory authorities have also assisted the AEC in confirming enrollment details for approximately 43 percent of occupied addresses that can be enrolled without the need for direct contact with residents. The AEC also provides roll products for joint roll partners (state and territory electoral bodies), senators and members of Parliament, registered political parties, medical researchers, government agencies and authorities, and the public. The costs associated with the roll administration activities in 2003–2004 amounted to $58 million (a period leading up to the national election), and the estimate for the 2004–2005 financial year was $46 million.

In Sweden, the voter register is compiled on the basis of the civil register, which is continuously updated by the National Tax Agency, the organization that since 1971 has been responsible for keeping a correct civil register. Before every election, the central EMB acquires from the agency a complete voter register, which is extracted from the database containing the civil register. The central EMB pays the agency a fee for this information; the amount for the euro referendum in 2003 totaled 500,000 kroner ($64,000). The amount is calculated on the basis of the number of persons in the register, with the per-name being 2-5 öre (1 kroner = 100 öre). The central EMB receives the voter register in an electronic format and produces printed registers for each polling station. This is done with the use of statistics and maps provided by the Land Survey. The cost of dividing and printing the register by polling station is equivalent to 300,000 kroner. Additional costs (almost 13.5 million kroner) involve the printing and dissemination of voting cards to all eligible voters.

In Spain, lists of voters have a permanent automatic character. They are substantially produced and updated with information based on civil registries and lists of residents provided at the municipal level. Voter lists are handed to the provincial office of the Office of the Voter Registry and then compiled at a national level. Lists were updated on a yearly basis until 1998, when monthly updates were established. Lists of voters are distributed to the municipalities for a five-day revision period before every election. Following revision, the Office of the Voter Registry distributes voter lists organized by booth to each polling station. Also, voter lists are distributed to political parties, but not to the Ministry of Interior, which receives only aggregate figures of voters at different levels of government.

Costs related to the routine production and monthly update of voter lists are part of the ordinary budget of the National Institute of Statistics, which totaled 200 million euros in 2004. The costs are not officially quantified separately in the organization of the Institute’s budget, but could be more than 15 percent. In its turn, the Ministry of Interior includes all costs related to the use of voter lists at election times (13 million euros in 2004). These costs cover reproducing the lists to be handed out to political parties; postal communication to voters informing them of the reviewing period before every election and of their specific polling locations; and the management of external voting. This extensive outreach effort explains why voter registration-related expenses have shown the largest actual growth over the last five years. The Ministry must reimburse the Office of the Voter Registry for these costs.

Spain allows external voting by mail, both within the national territory and abroad (the 2004 voter list consisted of 34,557,370 individuals, of whom 1.1 million were voters living abroad). Voters from abroad are included in a separate list of absentee voters that is produced by the Office of the Voter Registry with information provided by Spanish consular offices. At election time, consular offices share management of the ballot abroad with the Office of the Voter Registry. Voters first apply for external voting at the consular office; then most of the ballots are mailed directly to the corresponding local electoral commission, and a smaller amount is handled directly by the consular office for remittance in Spain. All external ballots—including those from within the country—are supposed to be deposited at local electoral commissions within three days following Election Day since the official vote counting must take place on the third day. External voting operations have recently involved more than 600,000 people living in the country and 295,000 from abroad, amounting to 1.8 percent and 0.8 percent of the entire electorate, respectively. Voting abroad has continued to increase over time, while in-country mail voting tends to remain unchanged (Ramos Vadillo, 2003; Brugarolas Masllorens, 2003).

In Guatemala, voter registration costs amounted to 20 percent of the total electoral budget in 2003. The rising cost was due to a particularly complicated method of updating voter lists by which the voter lists and polling stations were split into two sections: updated and non-updated. The process of updating the voter register by allowing people to vote closer to their residence resulted in a split register—nonupdated voters and updated voters. This made the entire operation not only costly, but also created much confusion among the electorate. A technical problem while processing updated voter information produced an unknown number of legally registered voters who could not be found on the updated register but were still on the non-updated list; the problem stemmed from the fact that the electoral law states that citizens must vote in the municipality where they are registered. The assessment by the European Union Observer Mission concluded that a main liability of the electoral process was the failure of organizing voter lists when allocating voters to polling stations in accordance with the identification records previously given to the almost two million voters who had updated their registration or registered for the first time. This shortcoming was recognized as a major issue a few weeks prior to Election Day, but the problem could not be properly addressed by the national election commission. As a consequence, many voters were unable to exercise their right to vote even after the commission decided to allow for a tendered ballot in the first round for those duly registered voters whose names did not appear on the voter list of the corresponding polling station (EU EOM Report, February 2004). Despite recent efforts to improve the rate of voter registration, accounts continue to be received of actual, if not legal, disenfranchisement of certain populations (primarily rural residents and indigenous people). (López-Pintor and Gratschew, 2002, 37).

In Cambodia, voter registration costs in 2002 were part of the commune election budget and were close to $1.00 per registered voter. In 2003, the update of the list was also part of the electoral budget and amounted to $0.50 per registered voter; the update of a permanent registry in 2004 was estimated at $0.14. Therefore, this is a case where registration costs were lowered in comparison to the overall cost of elections, largely due to the establishment of permanent, automatically updated registries. The cost of voter registration operations for the commune elections included the production of photographic identity cards for each voter. The total voter registration operation amounted to 20 billion riels ($4.9 million), which was included in the electoral budget of the commune elections.

In 2003, Cambodia created a permanent voter registry based on the voter list used in 2002 for the commune elections. Registration operations were delegated to the commune administrations but were closely supervised by the National Election Committee (NEC). The operation was an update of the previous voter list: voters already on the list did not need to re-register. Only those who had reached voting age or who had moved from one commune to another were required to register. Under this new system, no voter card was issued. As a result, the total cost of voter registration amounted to 12 billion riels ($2.9 million) and was incorporated in the 2003 electoral budget.

In 2004, as required by the Law on the Election of Members of the National Assembly (LEMNA), updating of the permanent registry entailed an annual voter registration and revision of the list even if there were no upcoming elections. Voter registration and list revision are conducted between October 1 and December 31 of each year. Therefore, a new valid voter registry is generated each year. For these operations in 2004, the NEC prepared a budget of 3.7 billion riels that was approved and provided entirely by the government. This amount was not part of any electoral budget. In future, this recurrent expenditure may either be granted on an ad hoc basis as happened in 2004 or eventually be integrated in the annual functioning budget of the NEC. The cost of voter registration will likely continue to decline as the procedure becomes part of usual commune administration operations. In 2004, savings had already been realized on training and direct assistance to commune clerks.

Since registration operations are no longer conducted directly by the NEC, part of the cost is now indirectly absorbed by the commune councils, which provide the personnel. Although the financial burden of voter registration seemed to be ‘passed on’ to the commune councils, the NEC is bound to provide “appropriate training, capacity building, facility, supplies and materials and budget to the commune and clerk to enable the implementation of these responsibilities.” Regardless, these costs are already lower than those of a periodic registration. The NEC also provides salary supplement incentives to commune clerks for the additional administrative burden during the annual update period.

In Haiti, as in Guatemala recently, the voter registration operation for 2005 will be conducted with technical assistance from the Organization of American States (OAS). Of a total electoral budget of nearly $49 million, some $9 million will be allocated to the task of voter registration, which ideally will include the possibility of creating the basis for a civil register, still non-existent in the country. The overall voter registration process will be automated, and no manual registration will be made. All voters will receive a digital card that will gradually replace the national identification card. The OAS is planning to establish 615 offices for registration activities (400 registration centers, 185 automated registration offices, and 30 automated registration mobile units). The registration centers will be located in rural areas; the automated offices in urban areas; and the mobile units in the semi-urban areas. The number of automated centers will be adjusted as required to reach a larger number of potential voters. It is estimated that the registration process will take four months (March–June 2005). The concept of operations also provides for the establishment of approximately 3,200 polling centers. All automated registration offices will also be considered as polling centers, and voters will be advised where to vote during the registration process.

Haiti’s provisional electoral council and the international donors have approved this project, and the OAS is already implementing it.

The government will directly fund operating costs for approximately 82 staff at the electoral council’s central headquarters. Provision of $2,017,167 under this heading reflects the need to hire voter registration officers. According to the electoral law of 1999, each voter registration office should comprise a staff of five: a president, vice president, secretary, and two voter registration officials. The monthly salary of voter registration officers is approximately $111, while voter registration officials receive $97 for a two-month period.

Voter registration in Afghanistan prior to the 2004 election was particularly complicated and even hazardous. The actual size of the electorate was unknown, and identity card ownership was very limited among the population. Therefore, a nationwide registration exercise was implemented, resulting in what was regarded as a largely successful registration drive. Due to the security situation, all registration centers were required to have communications (satellite phones in most cases) and to be well protected and mobile. Much money was spent on acquiring thousands of vehicles, in addition to setting up the entire registration organization to run a computerized register. With a $74 million budget, the voter registration exercise was the single most expensive component of the entire electoral process. An additional $7.4 million was spent on registering refugees in Pakistan the week before the poll. Unfortunately, the voter register was never used in the polling stations on Election Day because voters were allowed to cast their ballots in any polling station in the country. The EMB has yet to decide how to turn the current voter register into a continuous voter registration process.

Next: Electoral cost management practices