Voting process out of control

Hawaii’s makeup of distinct island communities fuels an instinct to preserve home rule. The fact that it frequently prevails as a guiding principle can be a good thing for many issues in which local knowledge helps to keep governance within reach of the people.

In the case of elections, however, the integrity of the operation is only as strong as its weakest link. For the 2012 primary, at least, that proved to be Hawaii County, where a breakdown in procedures caused a ripple effect of delays and has opened the election to challenge.

The experience has demonstrated, without a doubt, that an agency with strong statewide controls over the process is needed , through the imminent general election and beyond.

That is the Office of Elections, which lawmakers decided should be separated from the Office of the Lieutenant Governor, where it had been housed, to insulate it from political influence. Legislators in 1995 passed temporary legislation, made permanent in 1999, to create an independent agency, under the supervision of a chief elections officer hired by a commission.

This year, state elections officials discovered there was dysfunction in Hawaii island precinct operations — but too late to head off delays and confusion.

Earlier this week, the state office and the chairman of the Hawaii County Council were still searching for what caused some polling places — it’s still unclear how many — to open late. County Clerk Jamae Kawauchi, plainly out of her depth, has not yet issued a clear tally of the problem precincts.

Anecdotal reports indicate, among other problems, that polling books and other gear were not picked up until the night before the election, nor were they delivered properly.

Some voters may have been discouraged. In the aftermath, former Hawaii County Mayor Lorraine Inouye is seeking a recount in her race for state Senate. One of the affected precincts was in Inouye’s district, in which she lagged behind Sen. Malama Solomon by 69 votes.

Officials are working to rein in the situation now, well in advance of the general election. That’s essential: An elections process that’s out of control can produce serious consequences, and is vulnerable to corruption.

Critics, including former Gov. Linda Lingle in the course of her campaign for U.S. Senate, have proposed returning the office to the supervision of the lieutenant governor. And for his part, Gov. Neil Abercrombie has said that course of action deserves consideration.

However, the concern about keeping the elections process separate from elected officials themselves remains a valid one. Some other states make the same effort by positioning the function within an appointed, not elected, state office.

Two years ago, former Lt. Gov. Duke Aiona said he wanted a constitutional amendment to establish a nonpartisan, elected secretary of state to administer elections. About three-fourths of states have such officers, or a lieutenant governor, administering elections.

What’s most critical is that there be officials at the top riding herd on the process. They should delegate to the county clerks the checking of the voter rolls; local authorities seem better positioned to troubleshoot the registration list for errors and ensure that voting is accessible.

But there should be strict oversight and enforcement of uniform protocols, to ensure the election is easily accessible and retains its integrity. In this state, with its low turnout and weak engagement in the political process, anything less can’t be tolerated.