The article's title is misleading, and it misrepresents the content and conclusions of some of its sources.
The 28 million ballots in question aren't "missing"; they're ballots that were mailed to voters and weren't used.
In some cases the voters in question likely didn't bother voting (common in local elections) or simply forgot (I've done this when I accidentally stacked other mail on top of a ballot and then didn't find it again until too late). In other cases, voters may have moved and failed to update their voter registration. This situation isn't unusual or alarming, and the opportunities for fraud aren't nearly as plentiful as the article tries to imply.
The article cites a 2008 report by the CalTech/MIT Voting Technology Project as recommending that states abolish absentee voting due to fraud concerns, but that report contains only a single paragraph proposing a theoretical _potential_ for fraud due to "unsecured" mail channels. It provides no evidence that this is common or has even occurred, and in fact devotes significantly more space to discussing the inconvenience of mail-in punch-card ballots with Styrofoam backings — something I had never heard of despite having voted by mail for almost two decades.
The article also cites a 2008 Reed College study, which again raises theoretical concerns about fraud but offers no substantive evidence that it's an issue, and in fact states that "A report commissioned by the federal Election Assistance Commission, authored by Tova Wang and Jed Seberov, concluded, on the basis of interviews with experts in the area, that there was little evidence of voter fraud."
There's nothing magic about ballot sheets. Anyone could run off as many as they want on a copier. What protects elections in vote by mail systems is the fact that you can check your ballot status and everyone can only vote once. If you steal my ballot, I get a replacement and we both vote, that will be flagged. Plus you need to know how to forge my signature, which they do check.
Does your registrar even check that? SV's doesn't even check if a given voter voted both precinct and absentee or if one voted in multiple precincts (e.g. prior and current neighborhood after a move to another precinct). They don't even check for existing registration in other precincts (let alone counties) unless the voter explicitly provides prior-address data.
Every jurisdiction I'm aware of in the USA does ballot reconciliation, to detect double voting. Some are using electronic poll books, updated in near real time, to help prevent it.
USPS's UAA (undelivered as addressed) rate for first class mail is ~1%. Both ways. Something for postal ballot advocates to consider. Make sure your jurisdictions have online ballot trackers.
> - a location for those voters to obtain and secretly mark a paper ballot
But then how do you get more poor and minority folks to vote? These are the people harmed by not having mail in (or more appropriately called "time free" voting.
Don't we want more participation? Especially by those who find current rules end in a trade-off of wages for the ability to vote?
During the aughts, my small cadre opposed "vote by mail" (100% postal ballots, limited in person voting) because we believed it'd disenfranchise the poor, minorities, and students.
Anecdotally, because we had trouble accessing the relevant data, we reasoned those populations are more mobile, with inferior mail service, so postal balloting faces more challenges.
Until very recently, it seemed as though our predictions were proving true.
However, in my jurisdiction, since 2016, both voter registration and participation has increased, seemingly durably. I dare not hope, for fear of jinxing it, these trends continue.
Fast forward to today. I'm very worried about 2020. For so many reasons.
I've always supported postal balloting such that it enfranchises people who would otherwise be disenfranchised. (Postal balloting was invented for people serving in the military and otherwise wouldn't be able to vote.)
So during this pandemic I don't see any other choice than to permit postal balloting for any and all (on demand, no justification necessary).
But knowing firsthand the challenges my jurisdiction had with a gradual well funded switch over, it's going to be a nationwide fubar. Especially in non-urban counties without the institutional knowledge.
Now, more than ever, we need to pour resources into election administration. And managing expectations. For example, final results are going to take A LOT longer, so people (especially media) should be prepared to wait.
FWIW, my #1 lesson learned from my activism failures is:
Have an affirmative agenda.
Offense over defense. It's just so much harder to oppose stuff. Especially if you have an end goal. Like pushing rope.
If I could do it all over again, I would have started a "citizen owned elections" effort.
Creating an open source software and hardware stack, model legislation (for the policies, laws, rules, regulations, procedures), and educational materials (messaging, talking points, explainers).
I went all across my state with the "citizen owned elections" notion. It was a 90/10 issue. Broad support across Dems, GOP, Greens, good govt groups, etc.
> States and local authorities simply have no idea what happened to these ballots since they were mailed – and the figure of 28 million missing ballots is likely even higher because some areas in the country, notably Chicago, did not respond to the federal agency’s survey questions.
> This figure does not include ballots that were spoiled, undeliverable, or came back for any reason.
More philosophically, when one's voting agency is shared with another person, as is the case in ballot harvesting, the opportunity for abuse multiplies. This is why most states have outlawed ballot harvesting.
Consider: I come to your door with a ballot. You had not thought about voting because you didn't particularly care about the candidates, but I am an agent for candidate A and because I got to you before the agent for candidate B, I convince you - good salesman that I am - to vote for someone you wouldn't have otherwise.
Thus the voting process become less about what the voters themselves think or care about and more about which candidate has the most resources to send agents out to ballot harvest.
The corruption that such practices invite completely undermine the voting process and it is only with a blatant disregard for the voting process - a fixation on power above principle - that a state would allow such practices.
No, the reason is that Trump is a historically unpopular person and President. Blaming "ballot harvesting" is hilarious on the order of claiming Russia altered vote totals.
The article makes a similar point regarding the loss of Orange County Republicans, despite the fact that their prior strength has been eroded for years based on the OC's demographic trends, the vilification of refugees in a region with a vibrant Vietnamese community, and the elimination of the SALT deduction. The article is partisan hand-wringing, pure and simple.
The 28 million ballots in question aren't "missing"; they're ballots that were mailed to voters and weren't used.
In some cases the voters in question likely didn't bother voting (common in local elections) or simply forgot (I've done this when I accidentally stacked other mail on top of a ballot and then didn't find it again until too late). In other cases, voters may have moved and failed to update their voter registration. This situation isn't unusual or alarming, and the opportunities for fraud aren't nearly as plentiful as the article tries to imply.
The article cites a 2008 report by the CalTech/MIT Voting Technology Project as recommending that states abolish absentee voting due to fraud concerns, but that report contains only a single paragraph proposing a theoretical _potential_ for fraud due to "unsecured" mail channels. It provides no evidence that this is common or has even occurred, and in fact devotes significantly more space to discussing the inconvenience of mail-in punch-card ballots with Styrofoam backings — something I had never heard of despite having voted by mail for almost two decades.
The article also cites a 2008 Reed College study, which again raises theoretical concerns about fraud but offers no substantive evidence that it's an issue, and in fact states that "A report commissioned by the federal Election Assistance Commission, authored by Tova Wang and Jed Seberov, concluded, on the basis of interviews with experts in the area, that there was little evidence of voter fraud."