Dead cat

Dead cat at heart of Florida election controversy 

By Marc Caputo

Gracey Duncan seemed to be the type of Floridian a nonprofit voter-registration group wanted to get on the rolls to start participating in elections.

But two problems stood in the way: Gracey is a cat. And she’s dead.

“Why is my (dead)cat getting #voterregistration apps? This is #2,” Gracey’s confused former owner, Julie Duncan, asked her local election supervisor via Twitter.

The easy answer to Duncan’s question is that a database mix-up or mismatch led the nonprofit Voter Participation Center to think “Gracey Duncan” was the type of person — a minority or single woman — the liberal-leaning group wants to register ahead of the presidential election.

But because Florida is the nation’s most crucial swing state with a history of election controversies, the seemingly simple snafu led to a more complicated debate between elections officials, advocates and political science professors over how the state regulates voter-registration drives and rolls. None expressed concerns about voter fraud because of multi-step voter-ID requirements.

Still, the controversy has intensified in recent weeks as the Washington-based Voter Participation Center began conducting one of the nation’s largest voter-registration drives by mail, contacting 4 million potential registrants in 20 states, including about 630,000 in Florida, in March alone. And in trying to register so many people, the center has mistakenly identified a few dead people, contacted already registered voters under their maiden names or, in Duncan’s case, a pet.

That has confused voters and irked elections officials.

The center says it’s just trying to get underrepresented people more of a say at the ballot box. So it’s targeting specific profiles of potential voters: African Americans, Latinos, millennials and single women — groups that have a tendency to strongly back Democratic candidates. Finding these people, however, isn’t easy. It requires the center to buy data from direct mail firms and other companies that assemble profiles of people based on public and corporate records.

Sometimes, pet names slip through, even though the center screens for them.

In Duncan’s case, she told POLITICO Florida via email that she had “no idea” how her small orange tabby who died in 2014 wound up identified as a potential voter. “Other than the veterinarian and animal control, (rabies shot and county tags), I don't recall ever having to give out her information,” said Duncan, who lives in Oviedo, in Seminole County.

Page Gardner, president and CEO of the center, said there are “very rare cases” where pets get identified as people. She said the center also cross-checks Social Security Administration and master voter files to avoid attempting to register dead people or voters clearly registered in other states.

Yet, accidents happen.

“If their pet name sounds like a real name, it’s harder to screen them out,” Gardner said. “The more important piece of this story is the number of individuals in the state of Florida who are unregistered to vote. As of 2014, there were over 3 million people in the rising American electorate — people of color and unmarried women — who were unregistered to vote in Florida. That’s an enormous number.”

Indeed, if the center’s numbers are right and all these people were added to Florida’s 12 million voter registration rolls, it would increase the electorate by 25 percent.

But for Seminole County Election Supervisor Mike Ertel, who represents Duncan, the voter registration drive is troublesome.

“People think this is official correspondence when it’s not and it undermines people’s faith in the elections system,” Ertel said, adding that voter confidence is particularly important in the state because of its crucial role in presidential contests and its history of close elections.

Ertel specifically mentioned the legacy of Florida’s disputed 2000 election debacle, which was characterized by hanging chads, recounts, voter purges and the so-called butterfly and caterpillar ballots. It ultimately led to tens of thousands of spoiled votes and a divided U.S. Supreme Court ruling that delivered Florida — and therefore the White House — to George W. Bush by 537 votes.

"D.C.-based group tries to register dead cat to vote in #VoteSeminole. Dead cat doesn't comply. @VoteSeminole replies," Ertel said in a Tweet with a statement bashing the center.

Ertel’s colleague in Pasco County, Brian Corley, echoed his concerns and posted a separate statement on his website.

Corley called the center’s forms “confusing” and highlighted a local news story on Twitter where he said “Previously ‘a high volume’ of apps to dead people, non FL residents. noncitizens, minors and even animals" #aaagh.”

That, in turn prompted two University of Florida political science professors to push back against the supervisors and defend the center’s registration drives. Both faulted Florida legislators for making voter registration difficult for some.

“If Florida had same day registration, you wouldn't have to worry about fictional pets registering at the polls,” said professor Daniel A. Smith. His colleague, professor Michael McDonald, said nonprofits are “in a bind because they must return all applications or be punished, even when a person fraudulently fills it out.”

None, however, expressed concerns about the creation of fraudulent voters. It’s difficult in Florida because it would require establishing a fake ID to officially cast a ballot.

McDonald said the Voter Participation Center’s mission is clear and, considering the hurdles it faces, is effective in getting more people on the voter rolls who are otherwise marginalized.

“The real problem is the government has shifted the responsibility of getting people to vote to nonprofits,” McDonald said.  “It’s not like the center’s mission is to register cats to vote. It’s not like a cat is going to show up on Election Day and show ID and cast a ballot.”