When most people think about their in-person voting experience, they may remember the other voters at the polls or the election officials who worked hard to register people and help them submit their ballots. But in many elections, a third group is often present: poll observers.

Election observers are ordinary citizens who volunteer to observe elections on behalf of an organization. Many of them do so in the name of a specific political party. Other volunteers are nonpartisan poll watchers; They observe action at polling places on behalf of nonpartisan organizations, including national groups and international election monitoring bodies such as
the Carter Center or the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

Historically, the United States has not relied heavily on international election observers, and it
banned in some stateslike Tennessee. Most often, when journalists and academics
as
We In the United States, we talk about election observers, we mean partisan election observers.

If everything goes well on election day, the work of poll observers will be tedious. They will simply watch as voters perform the key acts of democracy: showing up at the precinct, interacting with poll workers, and voting. Partisan poll observers will likely also observe the counting of ballots and receive an official copy of the results in case they choose to conduct a simultaneous count.

What do poll observers do?

Poll observers protect their organization’s interests at polling locations. By observing the unfolding and counting of ballots, poll observers can help ensure that only eligible voters participate and that there is no blatant voter fraud – such as stuffing the box with ballots unauthorized voting –.

As observers independent of the government officials they monitor, election observers can add an extra level of transparency and accountability to election procedures and help ensure that elections are conducted properly.
free and fair.

However, poll observers can also undermine the integrity of elections. For example, poll watchers may zealously – and illegally – challenge a citizen’s eligibility to vote without cause. Or their presence can intimidate or put pressure on voters.

In the 1980s, for example, the
Republican Party of New Jersey They recruited uniformed and off-duty police officers to monitor the polls and posted signs offering a reward for information about people violating election laws. A lawsuit over the activity led to a national court order barring the Republican National Committee from using poll watchers without permission from a federal judge. The order was
raised in 2018.

Historical records show that, since the early 1800s, election observers from both parties frequently challenged the electability of candidates.
African Americans And
likely immigrantsoften leading to their removal from the electoral rolls. In such cases, poll observers can undermine the fundamental democratic principle of freedom of voter participation.

It is also important to remember that many election observers are partisan: they work on behalf of their political parties. In fact, in recent years, a
central objective of the Republican Party recruited and deployed poll observers. Our research shows that in the current era of polarized partisan politics in the United States, the mere presence of partisan actors at polling places can
undermine voter confidence in elections.

What are the rules?

Although the history and partisan nature of election observation may raise concerns about voter intimidation, various federal and state laws protect voters on Election Day.

Poll observers are subject to
federal laws that protect voters against intimidation and interference. Many states also have additional regulations that govern what observers can do when observing elections.

For example, some states require formal training.
The state of Georgiafor example, requires that all partisan election observers
complete training provided by their political party.
Observers in Ohioon the other hand, must be registered voters but are not required to undergo formal training.

Another important difference between states is whether they allow poll watchers to interact directly with voters. In some states, like Georgia, poll watchers cannot speak to voters. In others, like Ohio, poll watchers can talk to voters, but
I can’t threaten voters to choose a certain candidate or encourage them to vote for another.

Challenging voter eligibility

A final important difference between state rules regarding poll watchers is whether they can challenge a voter’s eligibility. Good faith challenges may arise when a poll observer has good reason to believe that a voter is not eligible to vote in the precinct where they are voting. Election observers in Pennsylvania, for example, are allowed to
maintain a list of eligible voters and could file a challenge if they believe someone not on that list is attempting to vote.

Poll watchers who operate in bad faith may launch challenges based on little or no evidence, aiming to distract poll workers, demoralize voters, and slow down voting, rather than ensuring that the rules are properly followed. .

Poll observers typically raise polling location challenges directly with election administrators, who are local volunteers and employees. Voters whose eligibility is challenged may be required to cast provisional ballots and present additional proof of their identity and residency to election officials, either on Election Day or in a subsequent court proceeding. It is important to note that many states have strict regulations aimed at
protect voters against arbitrary challenges to their eligibility.
Challengers in Floridafor example, must submit a formal written oath attesting to the accuracy of their challenge and are subject to prosecution if the challenge is deemed “frivolous.”

If a poll observer suspects something is wrong at a polling location while voters are casting ballots or while ballots are being counted, they can report their concerns to local election administrators or other election officials, such as local electoral boards. They can also spread the message through the political party they represent.

Many issues are simple to resolve and election workers respond immediately. More complex concerns – or allegations reported to party leaders by numerous poll observers in different locations – may ultimately lead to legal action in court.

Mollie J. Cohenassistant professor of political science,
Purdue University And
Geoffrey D. Sheagleyassociate professor of political science,
University of Georgia

This article is republished from
The conversation under Creative Commons license. Read the
original article.

Get all the latest updates from the 2024 US elections