Braintree Officials Support Bill to Change 2012 Election Dates

To make it easier for those serving abroad to vote in Massachusetts, and to save on election costs, Braintree officials and others across the Commonwealth have promoted a piece of legislation on Beacon Hill that would shift both the state and federal primaries to the same date in June starting next year.

The bill, which Braintree's voted unanimously to support last week, would move the state primary from Sept. 18 to June 5, along with the presidential primary, which is currently scheduled for March 6. A combined voting day could save taxpayers in Massachusetts $8 million dollars, split between state and local costs, according to William C. Campbell, the city clerk in Woburn who wrote the law.

More importantly, Joe Powers said, if enacted the bill would put Massachusetts in compliance with a law passed by Congress in 2009, the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment or MOVE Act, aimed at assisting citizens living abroad by requiring nationwide that ballots including federal offices be sent to them at least 45 days before election day.

In 2010, Massachusetts was granted a waiver because the difference between its state primary and general election was too close. This allowed the state to comply with the federal law and also resulted in ballots cast by email and fax, methods that require those voters to waive their right to a secret ballot, Powers said.

"We as election officers have a sacred duty to extend every opportunity to every voter to assist them in voting rather than throwing up hurdles," Powers said. "You should never have to expose who you voted for to anyone."

Out of the 1,882 overseas ballots returned to Massachusetts in 2010, 554 were by email or fax, according to a post-election report from the election division of the Secretary of the Commonwealth's office to the U.S. Department of Defense. Of the 15,000 or more Massachusetts residents living overseas, the ballots of 1,839 were counted in that year's election.

The legislation also includes a section that would eliminate voting for political party ward and town committee members on the primary ballot – a longstanding tradition that incurs extra ballot coding costs on local offices but whose elimination could also unsettle state parties.

The bill has yet to receive widespread support on Beacon Hill and has remained lodged in the Joint Committee on Election Laws since January. It received one hearing in May, but since then of committee members. There is no hard deadline on its passage, Campbell said, but the sooner the better for planning purposes.

Sen. John Keenan, D-Quincy, said he has yet to decide whether to support the measure, but is concerned that moving both election days to June could reduce voter turnout. "I have to give it some thought," he said.

Voter turnout was also the chief worry of Rep. Mark Cusack, D-Braintree, who said he needed to further examine its language.

"I will say I'm intrigued by saving the taxpayers some money," Sen. Brian A. Joyce, D-Milton, said. He added that he has heard from a number of towns about the legislation so far, but is not sure it's had a full vetting.

Campbell said he took voter turnout into consideration when writing the bill. June 5, he said, could very well still be an active time for the Republican primary, especially if states that have chosen that date, like California, New Jersey and New Mexico, remain.

Each of the state's 351 cities and towns now has a copy of a resolution in support of the law, Campbell said. So far town councils or boards of selectmen in about 30 communities have voted in support, according to a list generated by the clerk. A handful have said no and the vast majority have yet to weigh in on the resolution.

Another waiver from the federal government is unlikely, Campbell said, considering the U.S. Department of Justice recommended against them this September in a report on the MOVE Act.

And even if the September primary is just early enough to remain outside the 45-day window, Campbell said, it still would not meet the requirement because taking into account the post-election recount period and thousands of different ballot styles, the date would have to be at least in August for the ballots to go out from local election offices in time.

"The state has an obligation, in my opinion, to create a new scenario," Powers said.