HARTFORD, CT – Concerns about the state’s ability to properly implement no-excuse absentee ballot voting led Secretary of the State Stephanie Thomas to testify against a bill she would have preferred to support Monday at a public hearing of the Government Administration and Elections Committee.
One of the bills up for consideration was House Bill 7241, which would remove all statutory restrictions on eligibility for absentee voting. Thomas has often supported legislation to expand voter access, but testified against the measure.
“As a citizen and as a voter I would really, really, really love to support all of the election bills on today’s agenda,” she said. “But as secretary of the state, my job is not just to support good ideas, it’s to ensure that changes to our election system are implemented in ways that are fair, secure, transparent and help to make our democracy stronger.”
Thomas said her opposition to the bill stemmed from concerns that Connecticut doesn’t have the infrastructure in place to properly handle no-excuse absentee voting for all residents, and that it was unlikely municipal and state election workers would have built out that infrastructure by the 2026 election cycle.
“None of these individuals who would be key implementors of no-excuse absentee voting currently have the bandwidth to create the new processes that would be involved, or to make the needed structural changes to this system,” she said in written testimony.
But creating those needed changes in the system is the legislature’s responsibility, Coralys Santana, campaign manager for the Connecticut Project Action Fund, told the committee.
FILE PHOTO: Secretary of the State Stephanie Thomas discusses voting issues across Connecticut on Tuesday, Nov. 5, 2024. Credit: Jamil Ragland / CTNewsJunkie
“Connecticut voters gave the legislature a clear mandate to make absentee voting accessible for every eligible voter who wants to use it,” she said. “Accessible absentee voting is good for our democracy overall, and it’s especially helpful for working people, elderly people, people with disabilities, parents, and any voter with an unpredictable schedule.”
Santana encouraged the legislature to create a “robust and accessible” absentee voting system.
“This bill is a positive first step toward reflecting the will of the people by removing unnecessary barriers to absentee voting,” she said.
Another bill that the committee heard testimony on was House Bill 1536, which would establish ranked-choice voting for party caucuses, conventions and primaries, including the presidential preference primaries.
State Sen. Tony Hwang, R-Fairfield, testified in support of the proposal. Hwang served as the co-chair for the Governor’s Ranked-Choice Voting Working Group. He stressed that, if the legislature passes legislation authorizing ranked-choice voting, it would be optional for any municipality or party to implement.
Hwang said proper funding and voter education would be key to making the voting system a success, pointing to New York, Maine and Massachusetts as examples of successful ranked-choice voting.
“And the most powerful statement in favor [of ranked-choice voting] is you had a true representation of the demographic changes that evolved in Cambridge, Massachusetts,” he said. “And you had a more representative voting block of electors that people could choose from.”
Rep. Gale Mastrofrancesco, R-Wolcott, expressed concern about the potential for some voters having more of a say than others. She said if a voter makes multiple choices on their ranked-choice ballot and another voter doesn’t, it seems like one voter’s choices are being counted more.
Rep. Gale Mastrofrancesco, R-Wolcott, listens to testimony Monday during a public hearing before the Government and Elections Committee in Hartford. Credit: Jamil Ragland / CTNewsJunkie
“We seem to want to legislate behavior in this legislature a lot,” she said, referring to instructing people to rank their votes instead of selecting one candidate like a traditional ballot. “It just can’t be done. I don’t see it happening. This ranked choice, my goodness, there are so many questions. It’s so confusing.”
Rep. Nick Gauthier, D-Waterford, was more supportive of ranked-choice voting.
“I think when it comes to ranked-choice voting, the part about it that I like the most is ranking,” he said.
He called the current system “first past the post,” meaning whoever gets the most votes wins, regardless of whether its a majority.
“So if you have six candidates, somebody could get 20% of the votes and win,” he said. “And that does not seem to be particularly democratic, small “d” democratic to me. If you want to talk about voter disenfranchisement, well, if the winning candidate only gets 20% of the vote, you could argue disenfranchising 80% of the voters.”