A continuous list of voters must be regularly maintained after its initial creation. Since voter registration is not usually compulsory (except in countries with a civil registry), the election management authority needs to obtain changes in voter information – for example, changes of address or eligibility to vote. In some societies, up to 20 percent of the electorate might change address in any given year and the figure may be even higher in certain urban areas. If voters are not required by law to notify the election management authority when they move, the voters list may quickly lose currency.

Updating the Voters List

The following are techniques used by election management authorities to update a continuous register of voters:

• Data sharing. Negotiate data-sharing arrangements with other government bodies. In countries using a continuous register, data sharing is very common – for example, with the tax bureau, to which citizens are often legally required to supply information. The election management authority may obtain changes of address from the housing authority or the postal service. In New Zealand the election management authority is a division of the postal service, facilitating the data sharing. In federal systems, data may be shared between election management authorities at the national and the state/provincial level.
• Inquiry cards. Send inquiry cards to voters, requesting or requiring them to confirm the accuracy of their recorded data in order to maintain their registration and eligibility to vote. The card may be generated whenever the election management authority receives change of address information from another agency. It is a way of verifying the accuracy of the information. In the absence of a citizen identification number (not generally used in countries with a continuous register), it provides a definitive check on the voter’s identity.
• Door-to-door registration. To be Conducted either universally or targeted with door-to-door registration. In areas of particularly high voter mobility, a targeted registration may be cost-effective. It should be scheduled for the period immediately before an election and probably during the election campaign; this will ensure that on Election Day, most voters are still living where the registration officers found them. Note that a targeted door-to-door registration does not solve all the problems arising from high voter mobility. According to many election management authorities, door-to-door registration is becoming less reliable as a method of voter registration, and registration officers may have difficulty contacting voters through door-to-door visits – especially in larger urban areas, where access to apartment complexes may be controlled and people are concerned about crime and personal safety. If registration officers cannot contact residents directly, they should leave voter education materials that provide information on the registration process.
• Simplified procedures. Simplify the registration process for newly eligible voters, that is, people who have recently reached voting age or satisfied the eligibility requirements. Each country sets its own rules concerning how and when people can register. Citizens should view voting (and hence registration) as both a privilege and a responsibility. If they register to vote soon after fulfilling eligibility requirements, they will be more aware that participating in the democratic process is a key element of citizenship. The election management authority can encourage registration by adopting user-friendly procedures and making the necessary forms easily available – for instance, in post offices, voter registration centres, motor vehicle registration bureaus and other public offices.
• Provisional register. Consider establishing a provisional register of young people who will reach voting age within one or two years. If the voting age is 18, young people may be placed on the provisional list at age 16 or 17, and transferred to the general list on their 18th birthday. Registration thus takes place at a younger age. This reduces the number of newly eligible voters who need to be placed on the voters list immediately before an election and consequently flattens the spike in registration at that time. In addition, since 16- and 17-year-olds are still in school in many countries, the provisional register gives the election management authority an opportunity to introduce a voter education program into the high school curriculum.
• Registration drive: An election management authority, in an election year for example, may allocate specific registration weekends where voters can come and register for the first time or update their information.

Mail-In Forms

Since registration by mail is relatively cost-effective, it has been adopted globally for gathering census information. Applied to voter registration, this method can significantly increase the proportion of eligible voters who register, a result that can be viewed as justifying the costs.

The most expensive method of maintaining a continuous list is through door-to-door visits, with election officials contacting each household in person. This entails considerable personnel costs. They can be controlled by staggering door-to-door visits and going to homes only in selected communities in each registration period. But the problem remains that changing lifestyles and growing safety concerns are lowering the success rate of door-to-door visits. Given the high cost and declining effectiveness, other methods of contacting voters should be considered.

The most common method of updating the voters list is by making mail-in registration forms easily available. For example, the form may be inserted in telephone directories. The return rate will be higher if the form is pre-addressed and postage-paid. The costs may be substantial but they are far lower than with other methods of voter registration.

Deletions from the Voters List

Additions to the voters list are often made in response to requests from the people concerned; deletions usually are not. This is not surprising since a deletion may need to be made as a result of an individual’s death, criminal conviction or emigration. Although there might be family members who can submit the appropriate form, they often fail to do so.

For this reason, the election management authority generally relies on other agencies to provide information for removal of voters who no longer qualify. List maintenance procedures can be designed to incorporate data from sources such as government vital statistics offices, the obituary page in newspapers, funeral homes or relatives. The courts usually provide data on criminal convictions; health authorities supply information on mental incompetence.

List Purge

A controversial list maintenance procedure used in some systems is what is called the “non-voting purge.” This is the removal from the voters list of individuals who have not voted in a certain number of consecutive elections, normally two. If someone hasn't voted during a prescribed time, one or more mailings must be sent and elicit no response before the name can be removed. Alternatively, the name is removed and the voter is mailed a registration form or information on re-registration.

Advocates of the non-voting purge regard it as an important cost-saving device since it reduces the number of voters to whom the election management authority must mail official voter registration material. They also see shortcomings in the methods for identifying people who have died, moved away from an electoral district or otherwise lost their eligibility. In their view, the non-voting purge allows the production of a more accurate list of people currently eligible to vote.

On the other hand, critics of the purge see it as depriving people the right to vote who are less likely to participate in politics and vote in elections. The non-voting purge disproportionately eliminates the names of people who are more difficult to register, more likely to be socially and economically marginalised.

Opinions differ about the usefulness of non-voting purges. Some kind of purge may be necessary to prevent problems with list currency. Inflated voters lists do nothing to enhance the reputation of election administrators and distort voter turnout rates. Automatic non-voting purges may be somewhat harsh, but some observers see strong justification for notifying people that they may be removed from the list unless they respond within a specified time.