Michigan County Clerks Do the Right Thing and Open Themselves to Suit
It's not quite civil disobedience by county officials, but Michigan's
senate majority leader has asked the Attorney General to block what
those officials are doing, according to <a href="http://www.mlive.com/elections/index.ssf/2008/10/clerks_press_to_ease_s…; target="”_blank”">an
article</a> yesterday on mlive.com (Booth Newspapers). The officials
are county clerks, and what they've done is to cross-deputize each
other so that college students who want to register for the first time
back home can save themselves a trip back home and, instead, register
with the county clerk near their university.<br>
<br>
The Director of Elections says that what they're doing is okay, and the
clerks participating in the program (66 of 83) are from both parties,
but the Republican majority leader is convinced it's illegal and has gone to the Attorney General.<br>
<br>
And what
if it were? What if the law had been intended to make it hard for young
voters to register (most won't be going home before Thanksgiving)?
Should county officials just go along with an unfair law, which is
easier for them to do, or do they have an obligation to do what is best
for the college students?<br>
<br>
This is not, of course, a typical conflict of interest issue, but there
is a personal interest involved. Officials who go along with a
discriminatory law are acting in their own interest, not in the
interest of citizens being discriminated against. These county clerks
knew that they might be sued, but they did the right thing anyway. The
Director of Elections might be right that what they did was legal, but
that won't stop them from being sued. They also went to the trouble to
discuss and participate in the cross-deputizing program. They put the
public interest before their own interest, and I think they deserve to
be congratulated for what they've done.<br>
<br>
But what if this were just a partisan thing, if it were Democratic clerks
trying to help get more Democrats registered? Partisan activities are
not considered to be in anyone's personal interest. That's one of the
necessary limitations on conflict of interest rules in a partisan
political culture. But it also wouldn't be something to congratulate
anyone for. It would take the act out of the conflict arena, because it
would be neither public interest nor private interest, but partisan
interest that was at issue.<br>
<br>
Fortunately, that is not the case here. Only the act of the senate
majority leader appears to be partisan. Let's hope the Attorney
General, also a Republican, rises above his party's antagonism to
increasing voter registration and voting, and backs the clever and
courageous county clerks.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---