THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH, 6/29/10. COLUMBUS — I was disappointed to see that some Columbus City Council members are considering conducting closed-door meetings in the future ( Dispatch article, last Tuesday). Secret meetings, held out of public view, undermine the very foundation of our government and erode public trust in elected officials. If government is to be effective, it must be accountable to the people. When meetings are held in private, watchdogs are unable to effectively guard against corruption. Decisions that are made in closed-door sessions often are tainted by suspicion, which weakens the City Council’s ability to implement laws. City leaders often opine about the need to engage more community members in civic life, but closed-door meetings only serve to alienate the public from local government. Many residents might choose not to become involved because the message from the City Council is that they are not welcome at meetings. Read More

THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH, 6/29/10.  COLUMBUS — As more and more Ohioans opt to vote by absentee ballot, the neighborhood polling place could go the way of the milkman. Thus, a consolidation of many of Franklin County’s 865 elections precincts, as proposed in a plan before the county Board of Elections, is inevitable. But hallowed institutions, especially those fundamental to democracy, shouldn’t be cast aside abruptly, so taking some time to vet the plan publicly before implementing it is a reasonable approach.

The county Board of Elections voted last week to fold 62 precincts into others that already share the same polling place. That’s an easy call: The county will save nearly $200,000 through 2012 by not having to hire and train as many poll workers. In most polling places, the days of long lines are a memory. Needing fewer poll workers also will make easier the always-difficult job of recruiting enough of them for every election. Read More

In March, a special three-judge panel of the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the ban, in the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, is constitutional. But the panel expressed reservations about whether this aspect of that law, often called McCain-Feingold, could be reconciled with the Supreme Court’s January decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

The soft-money ban limits individual contributions to political parties even if the money is to be spent on activities unrelated to federal elections. Read More

AEI-BROOKINGS ELECTION REFORM PROJECT, 6/29/10.   WASHINGTON DC — We launched the AEI-Brookings Election Reform Project in June 2005 with the encouragement and financial support of the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. Five years later we bring the project to a close. This final issue of our electronic newsletter gives us an opportunity to reflect on the state of election administration in the United States almost a decade after the extended and controversial vote count in the 2000 presidential election and to suggest how additional changes in technology, election law and administrative practices might further strengthen American elections in the years ahead.

DOWNLOAD: Hope and Experience 2010

AGENDA FOR REFORM: Hope and Experience: Election Reform through the Lens of the AEI-Broookings Election Reform Project