North Carolina's early voting system has become one of the most successful and widely used parts of our election process as Republicans, Democrats, and unaffiliated voters alike have embraced its convenience and flexibility.

In the 2024 general election, according to data from the State Board of Elections, 74 percent of all ballots cast statewide came during the 17-day early voting period. In House District 27, close to 64 percent of voters in each county chose to vote early.

That is why I am struggling to understand Senate Bill 1084, which would reduce early voting from 17 days to 10 days. Introduced in May, the bill currently sits in the Senate Elections Committee. If it receives a favorable vote there, it would be referred to the Rules Committee, the last committee a bill must go through prior to a floor vote. There were efforts in the House last year through House Bill 66 and House Bill 411 to reduce early voting to only six days.

Before making any significant change to the way that nearly three out of every four North Carolinians vote, we should answer a simple question: What problem are we trying to solve exactly?

It can’t be a partisan problem because while it has typically been associated with

Democrats and unaffiliated voters, eight of the 11 counties with the highest rates of early voting participation in 2024 are represented by Republicans. Those results gave them 20 of 26 seats in the General Assembly.

It can’t be a geographic problem because those 11 counties stretch from the southeastern Coastal Plain to the Piedmont/Triangle region to the Foothills and Mountains in the west.

Also bear in mind that early voting participation has increased from 62 percent of all votes cast in the 2016 general election to 74 percent in 2024. During the 2026 primary, more than 712,000 voters cast ballots during early voting, the highest total ever recorded for a North Carolina midterm primary.

However, supporters of shortening the 17-day early voting period argue it is longer than necessary, especially in primaries, and shortening it would reduce county costs and staffing burdens while still leaving voters ample opportunity to vote.

While counties do bear all the costs of administering their elections, reducing the early voting period may not produce the savings some expect as many election costs are fixed.

Compressing the voting period does not eliminate those expenses; it simply shifts more voters into fewer days or onto Election Day.

Through House Bill 1089, state lawmakers have placed a constitutional amendment on November’s ballot that could further limit local governments' ability to raise property tax revenue, which could be used towards election administration. 

Additionally, we must consider in 2023 the legislature overrode the veto of then Governor Roy Cooper to pass a law – Senate Bill 747 – that prohibits counties from seeking outside funding to help cover those same costs.

So, we have restrictions on how counties can raise funds imposed by the legislature, but we're told that it’s concern for county budgets that require reducing the number of days for the state’s most popular method of voting.

The message to counties seems to be: The state won't help fund your elections, you can't seek outside assistance, your ability to generate local revenue may be further constrained, and when the bills come due, voters should simply have fewer opportunities to vote.

If county election costs are the issue, the state should fund elections – not shorten them. Cutting early voting doesn’t fix the problem; it just makes voting harder for people who already rely on it most.

Rodney Pierce is the state representative for House District 27, which encompasses Halifax, Northampton, and Warren counties.