This post appears here courtesy of the Carolina Journal
. The authors of this post are Alex Baltzegar
and Theresa Opeka
Apair of election integrity bills passed Thursday in the North Carolina Senate. S.B. 747, Election Law Changes, and S.B. 749, No Partisan Advantage in Elections, both passed with a vote of 28-19.
The bills will help strengthen election laws and make state and local elections boards bipartisan.
"Elections are invaluable to our state and country, and it's troubling that when given the chance to end the political imbalance on our elections board, Senate Democrats refused to do so,"
said Senate Redistricting and Elections Committee chairman Sen. Paul Newton, R-Cabarrus in a press release. "These two bills take bold steps to make certain that North Carolina's elections are free from political interference and devoid of any mischief."
S.B. 749 restructures the North Carolina State Board of Elections by splitting the appointments between the majority and minority legislative leaders.
The NCSBE would be composed of four majority and four minority party appointments. All would come from the legislature, with the following allocation:
- Two members appointed by the president pro tempore of the Senate.
- Two members appointed by the speaker of the House of Representatives.
- Two members appointed by the minority leader of the Senate.
- Two members appointed by the minority leader of the House of Representatives.
Local election boards would be appointed in a similar fashion, but with only one appointment per legislative leader instead of two. Local boards would only consist of four members as opposed to eight.
Unaffiliated voters will also be able to serve on the board, which is a change from current law.
A recent poll from the John Locke Foundation found that only 50% of North Carolinians think future elections will be free and fair.
"Keeping partisanship from swaying the management of our elections is something both parties should get behind, but today's vote shows that Democrats don't care about election integrity,"
said Senate Redistricting and Elections Committee chairman Sen. Warren Daniel, R-Burke, in a news release. "With the approval of Senate Bills 747 and 749, Senate Republicans are removing political gamesmanship from election administration and putting integrity above all."
Currently, three out of five members of the NCSBE are allowed to be from the same political party, allowing partisan decisions to be made.
Additionally, all appointments are currently made by the governor from a list of nominations submitted by parties.
For local boards, the NCSBE "appoints four members - two Democrats and two Republicans - to each county board of elections,"
according to the NCSBE website. "The state chairs of the Republican and Democratic parties recommend three registered voters to the State Board."
The NCSBE chooses two of the three recommendations by party chairs, and the governor chooses the fifth and final appointee, which will be the deciding vote on partisan issues.
Under the current law, when North Carolina has a Democratic governor, Democrats have the ability to exert control over all boards of elections, including local boards in Republican counties.
Similarly, when the governor of North Carolina is a Republican, Republicans have the authority to control all boards of elections, even in counties that predominantly lean Democratic.
The proposed Senate plan alters the existing framework by establishing mandatory bipartisan boards at both the state and county levels.
Under S.B. 747, board decisions are required to be bipartisan. On local boards, a decision would require agreement from at least three out of the four members. On the state board, at least five out of the eight members would need to reach a consensus for a decision to be made.
If bipartisanship cannot be achieved, it could lead to gridlock. There is currently no process for decision-making in gridlock scenarios.
If the board fails to reach a decision on the appointment of an executive director or chair within 30 days, the responsibility falls upon the General Assembly to make the selection. However, it is important to note that the chair must be chosen from among the four existing board members and does not possess tie-breaking authority.
Furthermore, the board has complete authority over the executive director, and the director cannot make independent decisions.
The bill also establishes Election Day as the deadline for accepting absentee ballots, prohibits boards of elections from accepting third-party donations, and addresses the loophole of having new voters cast a ballot before their address is verified. It also launches a pilot program for select counties to use signature verification software for absentee ballots and implements a process for rooting out any non-citizens from voter rolls.
House Minority Leader Robert Reives, D-Chatham, who would gain appointment power if S.B. 749 passes, said he opposes the bill.
"Republican leadership in the General Assembly has once again introduced legislation to claw powers away from the governor and into their own hands,"
Reives said. "S.B. 749 would, by design, lead to gridlock on elections boards and empower Republican-led courts to settle disputes."
North Carolina Democratic Party Chairwoman Anderson Clayton released a statement in opposition to the bill after Republicans introduced it at a press conference.
"When the voters elected Governor Cooper twice, they did so with the expectation and desire that he would be making appointments to the Board of Elections - but we know the NCGOP's playbook is to just change the rules instead of trying to win fair and square on the strength of their ideas,"
Senate leader Phil Berger said that House leadership supports the appointment power changes to the NCSBE, but they have differing opinions regarding appointments to the local boards.
Berger expects the two chambers will be able to work out those differences.
If the bill is passed and Cooper vetoes it, which he is expected to do, all Republicans would need to be present or vote in favor of overriding Cooper's veto if the legislation does not receive any Democratic support.
The bills now head to the House for consideration.
Alex Baltzegar contributed to this report.