Michigan’s Voter Rolls Include Someone Born in 1823 and Nobody Seems to Care

There’s a voter on Michigan’s rolls who was supposedly born in 1823. That’s not a typo. Eighteen twenty-three. Fourteen years before Michigan even became a state.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation flagged this exact registrant back in 2019. It’s now 2025, and that person is still there. Still registered. Still taking up space on a list that’s supposed to represent actual, breathing, eligible voters. If that doesn’t make you question what’s happening with election integrity in this country, I don’t know what will.

The foundation just filed a Help America Vote Act complaint against Michigan officials, and the findings are staggering. Nearly 2,500 registrants are listed as at least 110 years old. Forty-seven of them have birth years in the 1800s. We’re not talking about a handful of clerical errors here. We’re talking about systematic failure to maintain basic accuracy in our electoral system.

Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson has had seven years to address this. Seven years. That’s longer than most people keep the same car. It’s long enough to earn a bachelor’s degree and a master’s. It’s certainly long enough to remove registrants who would be pushing 200 years old if they were, you know, actually alive.

J. Christian Adams, president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, didn’t mince words. The continued presence of someone born in 1823 is inexcusable, he said. He’s right. An outside group shouldn’t have to tell state officials twice that their voter rolls contain the electoral equivalent of folklore.

The complaint also alleges nearly 2,000 duplicate registrations and almost 500 registrants with fictitious birth years. What constitutes a fictitious birth year? Maybe someone born in 2099. Maybe January 1, 1900, as a placeholder that never got corrected. Either way, it’s fiction on a document that demands precision.

Look, maintaining voter rolls isn’t glamorous work. Nobody’s writing songs about database management. But it matters because trust matters. When Americans go to vote, they need confidence that the system is clean, that the count is real, that their voice isn’t being diluted by phantom registrants who’ve been dead since the Hayes administration.

This isn’t about suppressing votes. It’s about accuracy. It’s about running elections like we actually care about legitimacy. Every outdated, duplicate, or impossible registration on the rolls is a crack in the foundation of public trust. And trust, once broken, doesn’t reassemble itself just because politicians promise to do better next time.

The irony is rich. We live in an age where your bank knows if you’re traveling based on where your credit card gets swiped. Your phone can recognize your face in the dark. But apparently, maintaining a clean voter roll is some kind of Herculean task that requires supernatural effort and decades of patience.

Michigan voters deserve better than this. They deserve rolls that reflect reality, not historical fiction. They deserve officials who treat electoral integrity as priority one, not something to address when an outside legal foundation files its second complaint about the same registrant who was supposedly born when John Quincy Adams was president.

The solution isn’t complicated. Regular maintenance. Cross-referencing with death records. Removing registrants who haven’t voted in multiple cycles and don’t respond to outreach. Basic housekeeping that any competent system administrator would consider routine.

But here we are. Still arguing about whether clean voter rolls matter. Still defending inaction as if pointing out problems is somehow more offensive than allowing them to persist. The Public Interest Legal Foundation is doing work that state officials should have completed years ago, and they’re getting criticized for it by people who think raising concerns about election administration is partisan hackery.

It’s not partisan to expect competence. It’s not unreasonable to demand that our voter rolls don’t include people born before the invention of the telegraph. And it’s not too much to ask that when problems get flagged, they actually get fixed instead of lingering like unwanted houseguests who’ve overstayed their welcome by several generations.

Michigan officials have a choice now. They can fix this, finally, or they can keep pretending that 2,500 centenarians and 47 registrants from the 1800s are perfectly normal features of a well-maintained electoral system. One option preserves credibility. The other destroys what little remains.

Related: Final Votes Cast as Republicans Fight to Keep Congressional Control