Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Election Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee debates write‑in registration change, earlier justice‑of‑the‑peace deadlines and youth DMV registration
Summary
The committee considered changes to write‑in candidate registration that would limit automatic write‑in counting (unless a named candidate dies or there is no name on the ballot), align justice‑of‑the‑peace nomination timing to ease clerks’ workload, and discussed existing DMV‑based pending registration for 16‑year‑olds.
The Senate Government Operations Committee reviewed election‑administration provisions that would change how write‑in votes are counted, move justice‑of‑the‑peace nomination deadlines earlier in the calendar, and discussed how the DMV’s voter‑registration process handles 16‑year‑olds.
Legislative counsel Tim Devlin described amendments in sections 9–12 that refine rules for write‑in candidates. Under the draft, a prospective write‑in generally must file a candidate form by the Thursday before a primary to have votes counted; the new language removes a prior “notwithstanding” phrase and allows exceptions in limited circumstances: if a named candidate on the ballot dies or if there are no names printed on the ballot, write‑in votes could be counted even without the form. Devlin said the change was based on a recommendation from the Secretary of State’s office and modeled on a Michigan statute.
The proposal drew substantive objections from several senators who warned the new language could create a scenario where a write‑in candidate receives the most votes but would not be declared the winner because they did not file the pre‑election form. “It’s really problematic to be creating a situation where someone could get the most votes and not win,” one senator said during floor discussion.
Deputy Secretary of State Lauren Hibbert and Sean Sheehan, the state elections director, told the committee they could not find past instances in Vermont where a write‑in beat a named candidate on the ballot. Hibbert explained the operational reason for the registration form: without a filed form clerks must count and evaluate every write‑in name to determine whether someone won, which is a large administrative burden on election night, especially in multi‑town districts where clerks do not share vote totals in real time.
Committee members asked whether the draft should be altered to avoid any perception that the person with the most votes might not be declared the winner; several senators proposed staff and the Secretary of State’s office return with alternative language or testimony from the Attorney General’s office.
On justices of the peace, the committee considered language moving the nomination/consent filing earlier in the year so clerks can proof the back of ballots and reduce errors before ballot printing. Devlin and elections staff said parties and clerks had been consulted and supported shifting independent nominations into alignment with party nominations, providing clerks an additional week to manage workload and catch spelling or entry errors.
The committee also discussed DMV‑based registration for 16‑year‑olds. Elections staff said the DMV process already creates pending registrations for minors who check the opt‑in; those records remain pending until the individual is of voting age and takes the voter oath. Clerks can see reports of pending registrants who will turn 18 and may do outreach; staff said the voter‑oath requirement distinguishes active registration for minors from active registration for adults.
Ending: Senators asked the Secretary of State’s office and the Attorney General for follow‑up on the write‑in language and asked clerks and staff to provide more concrete impact estimates and draft alternatives for committee consideration.
