III. Research and Report Summaries
Assessment of the Federal Voting Assistance Program Office Implementation of the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act – Inspector General, United States Department of Defense, August 31, 2012: This report evaluates the work of the Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP) and how it has implemented the federal MOVE Act, passed in 2009. It finds that the MOVE requirement for Military Services to establish an installation voting assistance office (IVAO) on every installation under their control is not being met. The Department of Defense (DoD) tried to contact all installations identified on FVAP’s website and failed about half of the time. One of the reasons this requirement is not being met is due to lack of funding.
The DoD is also concerned that IVAOs are not the most effective way to reach military personnel. Recommendations include developing legislation that would request relief from this requirement and focusing on ways to optimize assistance to military and overseas voters.
The report also finds that assertions about active duty personnel in FVAP’s 2010 Post Election Survey Report to Congress would be more credible if the response rate to the survey had been greater than 15 percent. Recommendations include improving the survey design to increase response rates.
The Cost of the Proposed Elections Amendment - Kathy Bonnifield, Citizens for Election Integrity Minnesota, and David A. Schultz, Hamline University, September 2012: This study examines what it might cost to implement a photo identification requirement at the polls in Minnesota and finds it would potentially:
- Cost the state $10-$14 million.
- Cost counties $23-$53 million.
- Cost individuals without the proper ID a total of $16 - $72 million.
The report states these estimates have large ranges because of unknowns in how voter ID requirements would be implemented.