[EL] Challenges to implementing "universal vote by mail" and limiting in person voting by November

[Marty Lederman]

Thanks again, David.  So, just to be clear:  If, under your preferred
system (for 2020), a voter *requests *(and receives) a mail-in ballot, she
is then ineligible to vote in person (other than by dropping off the
pre-received "mail-in" ballot), so as to prevent possible double-counting?

On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 8:17 AM David Becker <dbecker at electioninnovation.org>
wrote:

> Thanks for your question Marty. I briefly touch on this in the piece, but
> due to length limitations, I wasn’t able to go into it in detail.
>
>
>
> In states where they send ballots to ALL voters, regardless of whether
> they requested them, there needs to be a process in place to allow for them
> to vote in person if they show up. But the problem arises – how can you be
> sure that they haven’t ALSO voted their mail ballot. This creates an
> administrative challenge, that can require real-time connectivity on
> e-pollbooks in polling places (which some states don’t have, and could
> create cybersecurity risks), and likely requires offering in-person voters
> provisional ballots, which will lead to long lines, delays in results, and
> some of these provisional ballots being unnecessarily rejected.
>
>
>
> Furthermore, the states with success in mailing ballots to all voters have
> gotten there gradually, often over decades. Voters need to become educated
> about vote by mail. It took WA many years to go to all mail. CO the same.
> CA and AZ are close. But to suddenly and drastically change voting in a
> place like Texas, for instance, would likely lead to massive problems. Long
> lines at polling places, huge numbers of provisional ballots, massive
> numbers of votes that go uncounted (because mail ballots aren’t checked for
> errors at the polling place when voters can correct them), and
> unprecedented numbers of entirely rejected ballots because election workers
> aren’t adequately trained to verify those ballots.
>
>
>
> I think yesterday is instructive. Even though AZ has a longtime culture of
> mail voting, many people still preferred to vote in person, even in this
> environment. Even with reduced numbers of polling places, and fewer poll
> workers, it looks like in person turnout was up. If we limit in-person
> voting options, we will have problems, and if we also mail ballots to every
> single voter, the lines in those polling places and the need for
> provisional ballots will increase. I think there’s a middle ground that
> minimizes potential chaos and still encourages a massive expansion of
> vote-by-mail opportunities.
>
>
>
> David J. Becker | Executive Director and Founder
>
> Center for Election Innovation & Research
>
> 1120 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 1040, Washington, DC  20036
>
> (202) 550-3470 (mobile) | dbecker at electioninnovation.org
>
> www.electioninnovation.org | @beckerdavidj
>
>
>
> *From:* Marty Lederman <Martin.Lederman at law.georgetown.edu>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 18, 2020 8:05 AM
> *To:* Pildes, Rick <rick.pildes at nyu.edu>
> *Cc:* David Becker <dbecker at electioninnovation.org>; Rick Hasen <
> rhasen at law.uci.edu>; Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [EL] Challenges to implementing "universal vote by mail"
> and limiting in person voting by November
>
>
>
> I'm thankful, too, David, for that thoughtful piece, which reflects what
> others (including Rick (and Rick)) are telling me, too.  And I agree:  By
> all means, states should be able to keep polling places open, too, if
> public health conditions permit.
>
>
>
> But if, as you and others propose, it would be feasible and imperative for
> Congress to require states to provide mail-in ballots to anyone who *requests
> *them--ballots that could be either mailed back or delivered to an
> election site on November 3--then why would it be so much more infeasible
> to simply require states to *automatically *send such ballots to every
> eligible voter?  That is to say:  What's the great advantage in requiring
> voters to *request *a mail-in ballot?  (Push/pull, etc.)
>
>
>
> Sorry if I'm missing something obvious here.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 8:01 AM Pildes, Rick <rick.pildes at nyu.edu> wrote:
>
> David,
>
> Having just read your piece, I wanted to say thanks for bringing
> well-informed, realistic, and calm thought to these issues.  That’s what we
> need, not panicked overreactions that risk creating the destabilization of
> the election system that we are trying to avoid.
>
>
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Rick
>
>
>
> Richard H. Pildes
>
> Sudler Family Professor of Constitutional Law
>
> NYU School of Law
>
> 40 Washington Square So.
>
> NYC, NY 10014
>
> 212 998-6377
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Law-election [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu]
> *On Behalf Of *David Becker
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 18, 2020 7:55 AM
> *To:* Marty Lederman <Martin.Lederman at law.georgetown.edu>; Rick Hasen <
> rhasen at law.uci.edu>; Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [EL] Challenges to implementing "universal vote by mail"
> and limiting in person voting by November
>
>
>
> My op-ed in today’s Washington Post may answer some of Marty’s questions.
>
>
>
>
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/18/mail-in-ballots-avoid-coronavirus-yes-heres-how-minimize-chaos-unfairness/
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.washingtonpost.com_opinions_2020_03_18_mail-2Din-2Dballots-2Davoid-2Dcoronavirus-2Dyes-2Dheres-2Dhow-2Dminimize-2Dchaos-2Dunfairness_&d=DwMGaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=zdZqjXQuxQ1lwRr0UiepqKuWhxXD8g8tTBwAnD2kGhI&s=4fUFbt8ewww_lQrEfSzhO8aIjcj2JFKb1q16oSugiek&e=>
>
>
>
> In short, we definitely need to expand the availability of vote by mail
> nationwide, eliminating restrictions where they exist (~14 states) and more
> widely encouraging and promoting vote by mail. But there are a lot of
> moving parts to moving to “only mail” elections, and states where it’s
> working have taken years/decades to get there. If we limit in-person voting
> options too aggressively, we could disenfranchise many (disproportionately
> affecting minority voters) and add unnecessarily to the chaos.
>
>
>
> David J. Becker | Executive Director and Founder
>
> Center for Election Innovation & Research
>
> 1120 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 1040, Washington, DC  20036
>
> (202) 550-3470 (mobile) | dbecker at electioninnovation.org
>
> www.electioninnovation.org
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.electioninnovation.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=zdZqjXQuxQ1lwRr0UiepqKuWhxXD8g8tTBwAnD2kGhI&s=jDqiM6V_X2tjfwoCA1Qi73XZWklt55EcfokjaGlrChc&e=> |
> @beckerdavidj
>
>
>
> *From:* Law-election <law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu> *On
> Behalf Of *Marty Lederman
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 18, 2020 7:47 AM
> *To:* Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu>; Election Law Listserv <
> law-election at uci.edu>
> *Subject:* [EL] Anyone have a link to the Klobuchar/Wyden bill? [National
> Voting-by-Mail, etc.]
>
>
>
> They announced the Natural Disaster and Emergency Ballot Act last Friday
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.klobuchar.senate.gov_public_index.cfm_2020_3_with-2Dunprecedented-2Ddisruptions-2Dexpected-2Dfrom-2Dcoronavirus-2Dklobuchar-2Dand-2Dwyden-2Dintroduce-2Dbill-2Dto-2Densure-2Damericans-2Dare-2Dstill-2Dable-2Dto-2Dvote&d=DwMGaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=v3oz9bpMizgP1T8KwLv3YT-_iypxaOkdtbkRAclgHRk&m=zdZqjXQuxQ1lwRr0UiepqKuWhxXD8g8tTBwAnD2kGhI&s=Slao2BNQRR6o0t_CUcjXnKMMaX2tWE79ZV3Cy7oMfA8&e=>,
> but I haven't been able to find any bill language anywhere, and
> Congress.com doesn't show it as having yet been introduced.
>
>
>
> Does the summary description sound promising?  Sufficient?
>
>
>
> If anyone finds the language, please send along, thanks.
>
>
>
> FWIW, I'm inclined to think that Congress should simply require states to
> adopt the Oregon method before November, to wit:
>
>
>
> County clerks mail official ballots to all registered voters between Oct.
> 14-20.  Voters can mail the ballots back or deposit them at a central
> location (a "polling" place) at any time between when they receive them and
> election day (but they must be *received *by election day).  And if a
> ballot mailed to a voter is destroyed, spoiled, lost, or never received,
> the voter may request and easily obtain a replacement ballot.
>
>
>
> Several of you who support widespread VbM and who know much more about
> such things than I do have cautioned me offline that it'd be
> difficult/hazardous to impose such a requirement nationwide for this year's
> general election (even if it's an ideal solution for future elections).  I
> remain puzzled about why all states couldn't implement it if they began
> doing so now--why it's not an easier lift than a bunch of other emergency
> initiatives that are occurring as we speak--but I'm duly chastened by the
> skepticism of those of you who are more in-the-know.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Marty Lederman
>
> Georgetown University Law Center
>
> 600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
>
> Washington, DC 20001
>
> 202-662-9937
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Marty Lederman
>
> Georgetown University Law Center
>
> 600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
>
> Washington, DC 20001
>
> 202-662-9937
>
>
>


-- 
Marty Lederman
Georgetown University Law Center
600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
202-662-9937
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20200318/44687b14/attachment.html>