North Carolina tightens rules for partisan poll watchers

RALEIGH, NC (AP) — After receiving more than a dozen reports of conduct violations by party-appointed poll watchers during North Carolina’s May primary, the state board of elections Tuesday tightened regulations for election observers to prevent partisan interference in the November general election. .

The board voted unanimously to approve temporary rules for the upcoming election that more clearly outline the code of conduct for partisan observers, prohibiting them from standing near a “tabulator, laptop, poll book, or other voting document” where they can view ballots. marked or confidential. voter information.

The revisions increase scrutiny for both observers and poll workers, adding a list of prohibited conduct for precinct officials that prohibits them from tampering with voting equipment or expressing their political views on the job.

While poll watching has been an element of electoral transparency since the 19th century, the practice gained prominence in the 2020 election cycle due to unsubstantiated allegations of voter fraud by former President Donald Trump. Trump’s discredited claim that the 2020 presidential election results were fraudulent has prompted thousands of his supporters to scrutinize election operations across the country, intensifying concerns about voter intimidation.

A county election directors survey in late May found violations in 15 North Carolina counties, where officials observed poll watchers harassing voters and attempting to enter restricted areas to view sensitive voting records.

“While most were perfectly fine, several demanded to be behind the machines to watch people vote,” Davidson County Elections Director Andrew Richards said. “When they were told they couldn’t stand behind the voting team, several started arguing.”

State law allows political parties to designate general and precinct-specific poll watchers to monitor election proceedings from designated areas within the voting facilities on Election Day and during one-time early voting. These observers may report concerns to a precinct manager, but are prohibited from interacting with voters, disseminating information, or interfering with poll worker duties.

North Carolina Republicans, including some with close ties to Trump, have argued that further restrictions on poll watchers could undermine the integrity of the election in a crucial battleground state.

Conservative attorney Cleta Mitchell, who was on a phone call with Trump in January when he pressured Georgia’s Republican secretary of state to “find” enough votes to overturn the results of that state’s presidential election, was among those who advocated against the rule change during the first of two public hearings on July 28.

“This is really for the purpose of curbing the enthusiastic interest that many North Carolinians have expressed in making sure that elections held in our state are transparent and in compliance with the law,” said Pinehurst resident Mitchell.

The state board has opted to seek a temporary rule change to ensure the revisions are approved before early in-person voting begins Oct. 20, said Paul Cox, associate general counsel for the board.

“The existing rules, frankly, are not models of clarity,” Cox said. “We want to avoid any future disruptive issues, especially given that these incidents appear to have surfaced recently in numbers significant enough to concern our county directors.”

The state Rules Review Commission will now review the changes. If approved, they will be in effect for 270 days, Cox said.

Board President Damon Circosta said he will ask political parties and poll workers to complete another survey in late November so the board can assess the need for a permanent rule change.

___

Schoenbaum is a staff member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercover issues. Follow her on Twitter at twitter.com/H_Schoenbaum.

SHARE: