Voter fraud vigilance is appropriate

This week, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission ruled that it was 'allowable, allocable and reasonable” for former Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz to use $240,000 in federal dollars to conduct a more than two-year hunt for criminal voter fraud.

The dollars came to Iowa through the Help America Vote Act, an initiative designed to to improve elections nationwide in the wake of voting problems that marred the 2000 presidential election. The commission says the scope of improving elections includes investigating possible fraud. That means Iowa won't have to repay the money, which is good news.

We have some mixed feelings about this development. We were not fans of Schultz's criminal probe, which pulled in a Division of Criminal Investigation agent to conduct what smacked of a politically-motivated crusade by an ambitious politician. When the dust settled in May 2014, just 27 cases of illegal voting had been prosecuted, with, at that point, six guilty pleas, a deferred judgment, four dismissals and one swift acquittal by a jury. Most of those caught up in the probe were felons confused about their status after Gov. Terry Branstad revoked his predecessors' policy of automatic restoration of voting rights once a felon's sentence had been completed. Many did not intend to vote illegally, which means their actions fell short of criminality.

It didn't seem, to us, the best use of scarce public resources. In a state with more than 2 million voters, the result of Schultz's probe showed fraud is not a serious problem in Iowa.

That's the silver lining. And although we don't think criminal investigations are the best way to help America's voters, we do agree that it is appropriate to spend HAVA dollars on efforts to make sure Iowa's voter roles are accurate and that voters are registered legally.

Periodic administrative audits, improvements in technology, better training of election workers each can play a part in reducing the possibility of unlawful votes. Finding potential fraudulent registrations is an important job, but administrative measures and safeguards can handle it, even if they don't grab headlines.

Schultz's probe did show us the scope of the problem, and this week's ruling provides clarity on how states can spend federal funds to combat it. The problem here is small, and our leaders should invest resources needed to keep it that way in the future.

' Comments: (319) 398-8469; editorial@thegazette.com