Damon Townsend: Election Integrity Should Be About Solutions, Not Headlines
Procedure and process over political theater.
A late-stage dispute between the federal government and Washington state officials over verifying the citizenship of 405 registered voters should be addressed through established state legal procedures rather than political theater. Washington already maintains a clear statutory framework for challenging voter registrations well ahead of elections. Both federal and state officials should utilize these existing channels rather than engaging in partisan arguments.
This week, the U.S. Department of Justice sent a letter to Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs demanding that ballots from approximately 405 registered voters not be counted until their citizenship could be verified. The letter arrived just days before the November 3 General Election, after ballots had already been mailed and voters were actively returning them.
The issue has generated headlines, arguments, and plenty of political attention. But there is something important missing from much of the discussion.
Washington already has a process for this.
Our state has clear laws governing how someone can challenge a voter registration when they believe a person is not legally qualified to vote. These laws establish who can file a challenge, what information must be provided, how the voter is notified, and how election officials determine whether the challenge is valid.
This is not some obscure provision buried in the law. It is an established part of Washington's election administration system, found in RCW 29A.08.810 through RCW 29A.08.850.
Under the law, a registered voter in the same county or the county prosecuting attorney can file a formal challenge to another person's registration. The challenge must be supported by a sworn statement identifying the grounds and facts supporting it. The county auditor reviews the challenge, and the voter has an opportunity to respond. When the statutory requirements for a hearing are met, the matter proceeds through a formal process where the challenger bears the burden of proof.
There are rules, deadlines, and protections for everyone involved.
Most importantly, the ordinary deadline for filing these challenges is 45 days before an election, with limited exceptions. That deadline exists for a reason. Questions about someone's eligibility should be addressed before ballots are being cast, not while election officials are processing thousands of returned ballots.
I spent years working in election administration, including serving as Pierce County Elections Supervisor. During my time there, formal voter registration challenges were relatively rare. But the process existed, and we knew how to handle them when they came in. It was not a matter of political opinion. It was a matter of following the law.
Which brings us back to these 405 registrations.
The federal government has pursued voter eligibility questions in other states, so this is hardly a new issue for federal officials. We do not know exactly when they obtained the information behind this particular list. But given their broader efforts, it is reasonable to ask whether these concerns could have been brought forward weeks or months ago, while Washington's ordinary challenge process was still available.
If they had concerns about specific Washington voters, why not provide that information to the appropriate county prosecuting attorneys, who are authorized to initiate challenges? Why not have the matters reviewed individually by county auditors under the laws Washington already has in place?
Instead, we have a last-minute demand to withhold hundreds of ballots, creating a public dispute in the middle of an active election.
But I also have a question for our state officials. Rather than simply rejecting the federal government's demand, why not make a good-faith effort to work through the concerns using the procedures we already have? If the information is insufficient, explain what is required. If the challenges cannot legally affect this election, explain why and determine what can be done before the next one.
Both sides have a responsibility to protect our elections. Neither side should be more interested in winning a public argument than finding a lawful solution.
This is exactly the kind of problem the Cascade Party was created to address. We are building a political party that puts practical solutions ahead of partisan battles. We believe government should be efficient, accurate, transparent, and accountable. That means using the laws and procedures already available to solve problems, regardless of who gets the credit or which political party is in power.
The two major parties spend far too much time fighting over issues that often have straightforward solutions. Here, we have a federal administration raising concerns about voter eligibility and a state administration defending its election procedures. Both have responsibilities to protect the integrity of our elections. Rather than fighting through press releases and national headlines, they should be working through the legal process Washington has already established.
This is what makes the Cascade Party different. We are not interested in defending a position simply because it comes from our side, or opposing something because it comes from the other side. We want government officials to identify problems, follow the law, and get things done. If the process needs improvement, let's improve it. But first, let's actually use it.
I am not suggesting that questions about voter eligibility should be ignored. Quite the opposite. Every eligible voter deserves to have their ballot counted, and our election officials have an obligation to maintain accurate voter rolls and enforce eligibility requirements. Those responsibilities go together.
Our elections are too important to become exercises in political theater. We should not need a dramatic letter from Washington, D.C., in the final days of an election, followed by an equally public rejection from Olympia, when there are established procedures for addressing the underlying concerns.
We don't need political theater to protect our elections. We need public officials willing to use the laws and procedures already in place.
MORE SUMMIT
Damon Townsend for Pierce County Auditor Website.
