In early May, Kentuckians celebrate our annual appearance in the world’s spotlight with the running of the Kentucky Derby.  This provides a good opportunity to celebrate some of our other successes as well. 

In what may come as a surprise to many, Kentucky is nationally known for its advanced election administration.  For example, our statewide voter registration database is the model Congress used for the 2002 Help America Vote Act (“HAVA”).

HAVA sets forth minimum standards for election administration to address the problems that occurred during the 2000 presidential election.  Unlike most states, Kentucky already meets many of these standards.

Unfortunately, these successes are often overshadowed by recurring problems that we face with voter fraud.  These problems threaten our very democracy.  Recent headlines highlight the source of most voter fraud in our Commonwealth, a practice called “vote hauling”.  Most Kentuckians associate this phrase with vote buying and do so with good reason – too many Kentucky politicians and cronies use vote hauling as a conduit for illegally purchasing votes.

Technically speaking, vote hauling – paying someone to drive voters to the polls – is legal.  It is quite common to see vans being driven around on Election Day taking people to the polls.  However, this legal expenditure offers campaigns a way to launder campaign funds to buy votes.  The campaigns pay haulers who then use the cash as a bounty to get voters to the polls.  For instance, a campaign worker might tell a hauler, “I’ll give you $50, and you get me five votes.”

I think most Kentuckians agree that there is a need to drive voters who have no means of transportation to the polls.  In fact, to ban such a practice seems downright undemocratic and maybe unconstitutional.  However, I also think that most Kentuckians agree that there is a need to prevent this practice from tainting their elections when campaigns use it as a cover for vote buying. 

Some advocate that campaigns be prevented from paying more than a certain number of individuals to drive voters to the polls. Others recommend that a cap be placed upon the amount that an individual may be paid to drive voters.  Still others argue that drivers should not be paid and that they should volunteer their time.

I have a different proposal – one that addresses the problem while still allowing campaigns to use paid drivers in a legal and honest manner.  This proposal comes from a conversation with former assistant U.S. Attorney Tom Self.  Based upon his many years investigating vote buying in Kentucky, Self believes we can address the problem by creating a tracking system of vote haulers. 

Campaigns should be required to keep a list of drivers and voters who were driven to the polls.  Such a paper trail would serve as a deterrent to vote buyers and would provide an audit trail for potential investigations.  It would also subject the haulers and campaigns to perjury charges if they falsified the paperwork. 

A similar system already exists for voters who receive aid at the polls.  The voter and the assisting individual must sign a voter assistance form.

I certainly recognize that this may serve as a slight burden for campaigns, but any campaign that legitimately uses paid drivers should have no problem providing these simple lists.

During the 2005 General Assembly, I helped to draft legislation based upon this proposal.  Unfortunately, due to the short nature of the session and the preponderance of other major election legislation, there simply was not enough time to examine this issue. 

I am working with legislators to introduce this bill again in the 2006 session.  We hope that the legislature will take action immediately to remove the scourge of vote hauling from Kentucky elections.

While we can disagree about the solution to vote hauling, we can no longer act like ostriches with our heads buried in the sand and ignore the problem.  Our democracy depends upon it.