voteathomedev, Author at National Vote at Home Institute

Does Voting by Mail Increase Fraud? Estimating the Change in Reported Voter Fraud When States Switch to Elections By Mail

U.S. voters recently participated in the 2020 general election, which determined the next president as well as other public officials at the federal, state, and local level. While Election Day was officially Tuesday, November 3, many voters cast their ballots early—either in person or by mail. This article examines the claim that states can expect more cases of voter fraud when ballots are distributed by mail. It does not consider the consequences of early in-person voting or other challenges facing voting by mail, such as the timeliness of the U.S. Postal Service or the reporting of election results. Nor does it consider whether voters are more likely to incorrectly mark their ballots or whether election workers are more likely to incorrectly reject ballot.

Count Every Vote: Candidates Must Wait to Declare Victory Until All Results are Counted and Certified

As Election Day closed, President Trump incorrectly declared himself the winner of the 2020 presidential election early Wednesday morning. Despite the announcement, there is no evidence to support his claim. Election officials are still hard at work processing and tabulating millions of ballots, and every single vote will be counted in accordance with applicable state […]

Voters Decide, Not Arbitrary Timelines

Earlier today, the President displayed his lack of constitutional and election administration knowledge by, yet again spreading misinformation about the counting of ballots and the timeline of a presidential election. His remarks do nothing more than sow doubt in our strong elections system and confuse voters on what they should expect November 3 and beyond. […]

Mail Ballot Security Features: A Primer

(Brennan Center) — Jurisdictions across the country have a range of security features to protect mail ballots from misconduct. Because of the Covid-19 pandemic, Americans are using mail ballots in record numbers this year. Fortunately, the use of mail ballots is not a newfangled idea; it was already deeply embedded in the American electoral system before the coronavirus hit.

Election Workers Are the Backbone of the American Election System

Today, President Trump pivoted his misinformation campaign around vote-at-home options by claiming that election officials and poll workers — those who count ballots after they are cast — will be the cause for a miscount during the general election. In doing so, he removed potential blame he had previously placed on the United States Postal Service.

Without evidence, the President stated that, “The problem is when they dump all these [ballots] in front of a few people who are counting them, and they’re going to count them wrong. The post office is not to blame.”

In regard to his claims, the National Vote At Home Institute released the following statement:

“Election workers are some of the most dutiful people in our country. Election administrators take an oath before assuming their office and are committed to making our patchwork election system work in communities across the nation. They do this work alongside poll workers of all different backgrounds — our neighbors and friends — who come together to carry out one of our most sacred democratic traditions. In order to do so, they commit their mornings, nights, and weekends to ensure that ballots cast are ballots counted. The fact that they have now come under attack is completely unacceptable, and Americans cannot let them become victims of a misinformation campaign. In fact, we urge Americans to join their neighbors in becoming poll workers and to invest themselves in the process of making every vote count. Without election workers, our election system would be impossible to administer, and they deserve the utmost respect and support.”

The participatory and partisan impacts of mandatory vote-by-mail

Policy-makers disagree on the merits of mandatory vote-by-mail. Many of these debates hinge on whether mandatory vote-by-mail advantages one political party over the other. Using a unique pairing of historical county-level data that covers the past three decades and more than 40 million voting records from the two states that have conducted a staggered rollout of mandatory vote-by-mail (Washington and Utah), researchers used several methods for causal inference to show that mandatory vote-by-mail slightly increases voter turnout but has no effect on election outcomes at various levels of government. Their results find meaning given contemporary debates about the merits of mandatory vote-by-mail. Mandatory vote-by-mail ensures that citizens are given a safe means of casting their ballot while simultaneously not advantaging one political party over the other.

Safeguards for Equity in the Vote at Home Model

The following report outlines the most current research on the inclusion of these populations in existing VAH systems, as well as the elements in those systems that must be maintained in any new implementation models in order to increase that inclusion. As more states adopt these measures, we will continue to evaluate their impact on voters to close access gaps as much as possible.

All-Mail Voting in Colorado Increases Turnout and Reduces Turnout Inequality

The COVID-19 crisis has sparked interest in all-mail voting as a potential policy solution for avoiding in-person elections. However, past research into the effect of all-mail voting on voter turnout has found mixed results. We exploit the implementation of all-mail voting in Colorado, where statewide policy implementation was effective but turnout has been understudied, to estimate the effect of all-mail voting on turnout for all registered voters, along with age, racial, education, income, and occupational subgroups. Using large voter file data and a difference-in-differences design within individuals, we find an overall turnout effect of approximately 9.4 percentage points. Turnout effects are significantly larger among lower-propensity voting groups, such as young people, blue-collar workers, voters with less educational attainment, and voters of color. The results suggest that researchers and policymakers should look to Colorado’s all-mail voting approach as an effective model for boosting aggregate turnout and reducing disparities across subgroups.

Single Sign-up Efficiency Improvement Opportunity for Voters and Elections Officials

The National Vote at Home Institute conducted original research in the Fall of 2019 to see how many absentee voters from 2018 also voted that way in 2016, and therefore would have benefitted from a permanent absentee policy in their state, while in turn the elections officials in that state would not have had to process those applications a second time.

In the 40 states listed on page 2, citizens may or may not have to provide an excuse to sign up for a vote at home ballot, yet all are required to submit the same request, election after election, or year after year. And election officials have to process these requests again and again, often from the same voters. In the other 10 states, citizens can either choose to be on a “true” permanent absentee list, or they all get their ballots delivered automatically by state policy, saving voters time and hassle.

Signature Verification and Mail Ballots: Guarantee Access and Preserve Integrity

When voters cast ballots by mail, election officials need a method to verify their identity to ensure the integrity of the election. In many states, including California, county officials use signature verification, a process by which election officials compare the signature on a vote-by-mail (VBM) ballot return ID envelope to the signatures in a voter’s registration file. If the signatures are sufficiently similar, the ballot is accepted and counted—if not, it is set aside for election officials to review further and attempt to verify the voter’s identity.

California has been a leader among states in expanding options and facilitating vote-by-mail. With statewide implementation of the Voter’s Choice Act (SB 450) slated for 2022, all California voters will be given the option to vote at home and send their ballot in by mail. Increased adoption of this practice has brought state and national attention to all aspects of the vote-by-mail process, including signature verification. Small variations in these practices can decide close races.

The purpose of this study is to understand how California counties manage two related electoral processes: (1) verifying signatures on vote-by-mail ballot return ID envelopes and (2) notifying voters whose signatures were rejected and providing a process to allow voters to remedy this rejection. The latter process encompasses requirements mandated by recent California legislation entitled the Every Vote Counts Act (EVCA), SB 759.

We hope making this information accessible to election officials and the general public will raise awareness of how vote-by-mail ballots are processed in California. We also hope that, as a result, policymakers in California and elsewhere will gain a better understanding of how counties are performing these key electoral functions. Based on this study’s findings, we provide a set of recommendations directed to county election officials, the California Secretary of State’s Office, and to voters themselves to improve these processes and to ensure that, indeed, every vote is counted.

This report is the product of both quantitative analysis and qualitative interviews. To assess the effects of different signature verification processes on vote-by-mail rejection rates, we gathered and analyzed historical voting data for all California counties from 2004 through 2018 from the Election Administration and Voter Survey (EAVS). The bulk of our study, however, grows out of interviews with several national election administration experts and with election officials from thirty-three of California’s fifty-eight counties. While county procedures are identified, quotes are not attributed to individual county officials to preserve confidentiality. Together, the 33 California counties we surveyed represent over 32 million people—more than 80% of the state’s population.