Vote-by-Mail: the Safer Alternative

image courtesy of tri-statedefender.com

By NIKHIL PANDE ‘21 and GEORGE ROSE ‘21

With the November election only five months away, the U.S. still lacks a concrete plan for holding elections in the midst of a pandemic. SARS CoV-2 will not “vanish,” as some have promised, any time soon, so in-person voting may not be feasible, as it risks the health of voters and poll workers. At a recent statewide election in Wisconsin, voters lined the streets for miles and struggled to follow social distancing guidelines while waiting to cast their ballots. Their inability to protect themselves illustrates the safety problem posed by in-person elections in the COVID-19 era. Furthermore, the 23% decrease in voters from the 2016 primary to this year’s March 17th primary in Illinois demonstrates in-person voting’s potential to reduce turnout in this upcoming election. While an 1845 law states that the presidential election must occur on the first Tuesday after November 1st, Senior White House Advisor Jared Kushner said on May 12th that he could not “commit” to that schedule. Kushner’s comment highlights our government’s uncertainty for voting amidst the pandemic. However, vote-by-mail, a policy already enacted in numerous states, provides a safe and smart election system during this national lockdown. Although opponents of mail-in voting cry of “voter fraud,” no evidence of such a phenomenon exists. The United States must enact a national mail-in voting policy for this coming election to ensure that no American has to compromise their safety to exercise their constitutional right to vote.  

The vote-by-mail initiative, spearheaded predominantly by Democrats, will increase the turnout, safety, and convenience of the 2020 election. The initiative proposes that every registered voter in America will receive an official ballot and a return envelope in the mail several weeks before election day. The voter then fills out a ballot, encloses it in the return envelope, and sends it back to the town government. Finally, each town will collect ballots until a certain time, after which any received ballots will not be counted. The policy differs from “no excuse” absentee voting, where voters would have to individually “opt in” to receive a ballot. Here, every voter would receive a ballot and could choose whether or not to return it. When ballots are conveniently mailed to everyone eligible, more people vote.

President Donald Trump has been vote-by-mail’s loudest opponent. In recent weeks, he has attacked Democratically-governed states such as Michigan, California, and Nevada for their plans to use mail-in voting. In a tweet on May 20th, Trump even threatened to withhold funding for the state of Michigan if they instituted vote-by-mail, though he may not possess that power. However, Trump did not confront Nebraska, West Virginia, and Georgia, GOP-run states, which have also tried to expand their mail-in programs. Nevertheless, Trump claims that the policy is “wrought with fraud and abuse” and says that “thousands and thousands of people [are] sitting in somebody’s living room, signing ballots all over the place.” Trump has even cut funding to the U.S. Postal Service in an effort to stop mail-in voting. Despite his claims, Trump ironically mailed in his ballot in Florida’s primary election several months ago. But Trump may be attacking vote-by-mail for political reasons: when asked about House Democrats’ legislation allowing all registered voters to request a mail-in ballot without declaring a reason, he responded that, if enacted, “you’d never have a Republican elected in this country again.” Trump evidently believes that the higher turnout enabled by allowing every American to vote from their living room in November increases the chance of a Democratic victory. 

Indeed, vote-by-mail has proved to increase overall election turnout: The state of Colorado enacted universal vote-by-mail for the 2018 midterm election, and according to The New York Times, turnout increased by over 9 percentage points. Specifically, African-Americans in Colorado saw a 13 percentage-point increase, Latino voters a 10 percentage-point increase, and Asian-Americans an 11 percentage-point increase. Youth and blue collar workers voted 16 and 10 percentage-points more, respectively. The New York Times’ research also concluded that vote-by-mail reduced the trend of wealthier voters’ turning out disproportionately more than middle class voters. Contrary to Trump’s beliefs, however, the effect of vote-by-mail in Colorado had minimal partisan effects, as both Republicans and Democrats enjoyed an 8 percentage-point boost in voting.

Furthermore, no evidence exists for Trump’s claims about rampant mail-in voter fraud. For over 20 years, the state of Oregon has conducted all statewide elections by mail. According to a voter fraud database created by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, Oregon has seen only two proven cases of voter fraud related to mail-in ballots. Similarly, Utah has reported zero cases of mail-in voting-related fraud since it began conducting elections by mail-in ballot in 2013. On a national scale, almost 250 million ballots have been submitted by mail in the last 20 years, and the database has recorded only 143 total cases of mail-related voter fraud over that time period, a 0.0000057% fraud rate. So if mail-in voting elicits so little voter fraud, why does Donald Trump oppose it so strongly?

Starting when he demanded a Ukranian investigation into Joe Biden, Trump has done everything he believes will improve his election chances. Using the imaginary specter of “voter fraud,” Trump is fighting tooth and nail against the vote-by-mail initiative, though his true desires may be political. However, both his grievances are unfounded: No evidence of increased voter fraud or improved Democratic performance under mail-in voting exists. Nevertheless, the implementation of this policy is key to holding a high-turnout and thus truly democratic election without risking the lives of Americans. Without this policy, thousands more may die, and in the United States of America, the right to vote should not cost so much.