Special Report: Will your mail ballot count in the U.S. presidential
election? It may depend on who's counting and where
Send a link to a friend
[September 25, 2020]
By Julia Harte, Jason Lange and Simon Lewis
(Reuters) - Two elderly women in small
towns in Wisconsin voted by mail during April’s presidential nominating
contests. Both were sheltering in place as coronavirus surged across
their state.
Each mailed her ballot to the local election office with a note
explaining why no witness had signed the envelope, as Wisconsin’s strict
voting laws require. The women didn’t want to risk virus exposure, they
told Reuters in telephone interviews this month.
That’s where the similarity ends. The ballot of Peggy Houglum, a
72-year-old voter in the eastern Wisconsin hamlet of Cedar Grove, was
rejected due to the missing witness information. That of Judith Olson,
88, a resident of the northern town of Elk, was accepted, according to
“incident” logs viewed by Reuters in which Wisconsin election offices
document irregular ballots. Houglum, who plans to vote for Democratic
presidential candidate Joe Biden in November, said she was never told
her ballot didn’t count. Olson wouldn’t provide her party affiliation or
say whom she supports for president.
Local election officials confirmed the fate of those ballots. Cedar
Grove Village Clerk Julie Brey told Reuters she had sought guidance from
the Wisconsin Elections Commission on what to do. Her Elk counterpart,
Suzanne Brandt, said she couldn’t recall who advised her to accept an
unwitnessed ballot.
The unequal treatment in the same crucial battleground state underscores
a growing worry about the general election on Nov. 3 between Biden and
incumbent Republican President Donald Trump. Whether or not a mail
ballot is counted could depend to a large degree on how local election
workers enforce mail-in voting rules, how they notify voters who submit
deficient ballots, and whether they allow them to fix such errors. Each
of the 50 U.S. states has a central election authority, but ballots are
processed by dozens of separate county or municipal election offices
within each state.
Reuters reviewed incident logs and other election records from
Wisconsin’s April race. The news organization also examined data from
election offices in North Carolina, Florida and Arizona containing the
number of mail-in ballots rejected in recent elections in those
presidential battlegrounds. Reuters also surveyed 36 election officials
across the four states about how they processed mail-in ballots,
notified voters who mailed deficient ballots, and enabled those voters
to cast valid votes.
The records detailed more than 3 million mail ballots cast during the
four states’ presidential nomination contests this year. The vast
majority of those were accepted, but at least 25,000 mail-in ballots
were rejected for violations of signature and witness requirements.
Reuters could not follow up with all individuals whose ballots were
rejected. Still, some trends emerged from the statewide data and
interviews with dozens of voters and election officials.
Reuters found:
- Minorities, who tend to vote Democratic, are more likely than white
voters to have their mail-in ballots rejected for signature and witness
issues in North Carolina and Florida. Voter race data was unavailable in
Arizona and Wisconsin.
- Procedures for handling deficient mail ballots differed, sometimes
markedly, between election offices within each state; and election
officials told Reuters of varying timetables and methods for notifying
voters. Ballot designs also diverged, with signature boxes clearer on
some than others.
- Geography and population size helped determine how easily election
officials could contact voters about ballot deficiencies. Officials in
small, compact jurisdictions tended to say they found it easier to
notify voters than did their counterparts in larger communities, because
they were more likely to know voters personally.
(For a graphic on ballot rejections in four battleground states, see
https://tmsnrt.rs/3mLFOl8)
'VOTING WITHOUT A SAFETY NET'
U.S. mail-in voting surged in states that held presidential primaries
after mid-March, when the COVID-19 pandemic exploded. Millions of
Americans are projected to cast mail ballots for the first time this
November, with coronavirus expected to drive record-high absentee
turnout.
Slowed U.S. Postal Service deliveries this summer raised alarms about
ballots arriving too late to be counted. But voters may not be aware of
other potential pitfalls.
The uneven application of mail-in voting rules illegally disadvantages
some voters, according to voting-rights advocates, who have sued to
standardize the way local officials process absentee ballots, notify
voters about errors and allow voters to fix them in the four states that
Reuters examined. One lawsuit failed in September to eliminate
Wisconsin’s witness requirement. Another successfully extended the
period for Arizona voters to add signatures to unsigned ballots.
Activists won settlements in two additional cases, one in Florida, the
other in North Carolina, though they say those states have yet to comply
fully.
For millions of U.S. voters, voting-rights advocates say, the odds of
their mail-in ballot counting this November could come down to where
they are registered to vote and how workers in their local election
office implement their state’s voting rules.
"Mail-in voting is voting without a safety net," because voters are not
present to resolve any issues that arise with their mail ballots, said
David Becker, head of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation &
Research. That underscores why statewide rules "shouldn’t be applied
differently county to county," he said.
Jason Snead, executive director at the conservative Honest Elections
Project, said election officials should apply absentee ballot
requirements as uniformly as possible. Still he said “absolute
uniformity” goes against the U.S. tradition of running elections locally
to provide “flexibility, responsiveness and direct accountability to
voters.” He said voters need to know they must "follow every rule that
is written out on that ballot, make sure that they've crossed every t,
dotted every i.”
The stakes are high.
Trump won the White House in 2016 by a whisker. He lost the popular
vote, but fewer than 80,000 votes in three crucial states, including
Wisconsin, handed him an Electoral College victory over Democrat Hillary
Clinton. Recent polls slightly favor Biden in Wisconsin, but he and
Trump are neck-and-neck in Florida, Arizona and North Carolina.
The number of rejected mail ballots is almost certain to be higher in
November than it was in this year’s primaries because of higher expected
turnout, election experts said.
In North Carolina, for example, about 1% of voters cast mail ballots in
the March 3 primary, before coronavirus swept the nation. That figure
could soar close to 25% in November, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll
of likely voters conducted earlier this month. About a third of voters
in Florida expect to vote by mail, as do about two in five voters in
Wisconsin and more than half in Arizona, other Reuters/Ipsos polls
showed this month.
If officials in North Carolina and Florida alone toss out ballots in
November at the rates they did in March, more than 75,000 voters could
be disenfranchised, Reuters calculates. That figure assumes turnout
matches 2016 levels, and that voters end up casting mail ballots at the
levels they said they would in the polls.
(For a primer on mail-in voting in the United States, see: https://tmsnrt.rs/3ic6mt9)
TALE OF TWO BALLOTS
In the four battleground states, Reuters found examples of 24 voters
whose ballots were rejected without their knowledge, because local
authorities used different mail-in ballot counting processes or
notification procedures than other localities in the same state.
Election officials in almost every case claimed they had attempted to
notify voters who cast deficient ballots and informed them how to cast a
valid vote.
Wisconsin and North Carolina are among 11 U.S. states that require
absentee ballot envelopes to be signed by a witness.
More than half of the 23,000 absentee ballots rejected in Wisconsin’s
April 7 primary were thrown out for lacking a voter signature, witness
information or both, according to state data. On April 2, a federal
district judge in Wisconsin relaxed the witness requirement due to the
pandemic. That ruling was overturned by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals
the next day.
Election officials statewide applied the witness requirement in myriad
ways, according to a Reuters analysis of incident logs and other public
records from municipalities comprising about 80% of Wisconsin’s
electorate.
In the eastern Wisconsin village of Waldo, home to around 500 people,
Clerk-Treasurer Michelle Brecht noticed a dozen voters had omitted
witness information on their mail ballots; witnesses must provide a
signature and an address. Because Brecht knew almost everyone in town,
she told Reuters, she contacted all affected voters and was able to help
them fix their ballots.
[to top of second column]
|
Poll workers prepare absentee ballots for shipment at the Wake
County Board of Elections on the first day that the state started
mailing them out, in Raleigh, North Carolina, U.S. September 4,
2020. REUTERS/Jonathan Drake
In the western Wisconsin town of Pepin, meanwhile, ballots lacking
voter signatures and witness information were among 143 mail votes
counted, according to County Board of Canvassers’ minutes from the
April primary. The minutes did not say how many mail ballots were
deficient, but the board recommended “more training for election
workers in the area of absentee ballot processing.”
Nancy Wolfe, town clerk of Pepin, whose population is a little more
than 800 residents, said her staff had received additional training.
She did not respond when asked specifically about the board’s claim
that deficient absentee ballots were accepted in the April primary.
Some inconsistencies likely arose from confusion over the
last-minute court rulings, according to Jay Heck, state director for
Common Cause Wisconsin, a government watchdog group. The appeals
court reversed the district court’s lifting of the witness
requirement just days before the election, he noted, leaving
election officials disoriented. Heck also pointed to Wisconsin’s
“unusually decentralized” election administration system, in which
1,850 separate municipalities handle voter registration and absentee
ballots.
North Carolina’s witness requirement is even stricter: Absentee
voters had to find two witnesses for the March 3 primary. That
tripped up retiree William Hearn. He told Reuters he only got one
witness to sign his ballot envelope. (For the November presidential
contest, North Carolina is allowing voters to secure a single
witness.)
Hearn, 72, was one of at least 121 voters in Durham County and
nearly 1,800 statewide who had mail-in ballots rejected for missing
signature or witness information, according to a Reuters analysis of
state election data.
Derek Bowens, director of the elections board of Durham County,
which contains North Carolina’s fourth-largest city, Durham, said
his office mailed a replacement ballot with a letter of explanation
to Hearn on February 27, one day after receiving his incomplete
ballot.
Hearn said he never received it and had no idea his original ballot
had been rejected until notified in September by Reuters. “I have a
very big problem with that,” Hearn said. A Biden supporter, he now
fears his mail ballot could be rejected in November without his
knowledge.
An hour south in Harnett County, Republican David Krachun, 57,
forgot to sign his ballot in the March primary. In contrast to
Durham, Harnett County voters who cast deficient ballots were
notified twice by mail and as many times as necessary by phone,
according to county elections director Claire Jones.
Of the 25 voters who had mail ballots rejected in Harnett County,
which is largely Republican, seven eventually cast a ballot that
counted, according to Jones; they included Krachun, who mailed in a
second absentee ballot that was accepted. Harnett County's 28%
"cure" rate was close to three times that of Durham County, a
Democratic stronghold.
RACIAL DISPARITIES
Krachun is white, while Hearn, whose ballot was rejected, is Black.
During the March election in North Carolina, about 5% of all voters
who returned mail ballots had them rejected for signature or witness
issues and ended up not casting a vote that counted, state election
records show. Broken down by race, about 8% of Black voters didn’t
wind up casting a valid vote after their mail ballots were tossed
compared to about 5% of white voters. Election officials interviewed
by Reuters had no explanation for the disparity.
Florida counties also reject mail-in ballots at widely varying
rates, and they reject Black and Hispanic voters at higher rates
than white voters, according to University of Florida professor
Daniel Smith.
Smith examined mail-in ballots in March’s presidential primary that
were recorded as being delivered by Election Day. Out of those
voters, 1.1% of Hispanics and 0.8% of Blacks had their ballots
rejected, Smith found, compared with just 0.4% of whites.
Officials in six Florida counties where minorities were rejected at
significantly higher rates than white voters said their offices
applied the rules consistently and that racial and ethnic
disparities must be due to factors outside their control.
“It's definitely not something purposely being done,” said Kari
Ewalt, community relations manager for the supervisor of elections
in Osceola County. Smith found that Hispanic voters there were more
than twice as likely as white voters to have their ballots rejected.
One possible explanation is that many minority voters have little
experience with mail voting. But Smith found that even accounting
for that, Black and Hispanic voters were more likely to have their
ballots rejected. The variation across Florida counties suggested
“it can’t just be the individual’s fault,” Smith said.
Disparities could arise from officials in some election offices
being stricter when scrutinizing a voter’s signature, Smith said.
The design of the ballot return envelope, and how quickly officials
process ballots and flag problems to voters, are also potential
factors, he said.
NO STANDARD PROCESS
Local election officials in all four states have considerable leeway
in how they process mail-in ballots and respond to errors.
In Florida, officials must contact voters whose ballots lack
signatures and offer them a chance to confirm their identities with
an affidavit, which can be returned up to two days after the polls
close. But there is no set prescription for how to do that. Some
election offices first try to call the voter, others first put the
affidavit in the mail. Others said they primarily use email.
In North Carolina, a Reuters survey of 20 counties revealed similar
differences. In rural Lee County, Karen Marosites, deputy director
of elections, said it sometimes took eight days to notify a voter of
a deficient mail-in ballot.
In response to a lawsuit brought by groups including the Southern
Coalition for Social Justice, a civil rights organization, a federal
judge in North Carolina in August ordered the state elections board
to publish statewide guidance that would bring the state’s 100
counties into alignment.
Coalition attorneys said the resulting guidance, released September
22, was an improvement but still lacked clarity on how counties
would help voters cure deficient ballots. The North Carolina
elections board did not respond to requests for comment.
In Wisconsin, a federal district judge in September upheld
Wisconsin’s witness requirement after the Democratic National
Committee sued to remove it due to the pandemic.
In Arizona, another lawsuit filed by the Democratic Party this year
prompted the state’s 15 counties to standardize how mail-in voters
could fix signature issues, giving them five business days after
Election Day to cure unsigned ballots and mismatched signatures. But
officials still have significant leeway in contacting voters.
Pima County, Arizona’s second-largest, mails replacement ballots
only to voters whose unsigned ballots arrive more than a week before
Election Day. Rural Apache County, meanwhile, notifies such voters
via phone, email and U.S. mail, and follows up at least twice with
phone and email if needed -- in addition to sending back the
unsigned ballot if there is enough time for voters to sign and
return it. “We have had people call us mad that we are ‘spamming’
them,” said Apache County Chief Deputy Recorder Bowen Udall.
Alex Gulotta, the Arizona state director of All Voting is Local, a
voting-rights group, said such differences can determine whether
votes count - or not.
“There shouldn’t even be a possibility for that much variance to
exist between the counties,” Gulotta said.
(Reporting by Julia Harte, Jason Lange and Simon Lewis in
Washington, D.C.; Editing by Marla Dickerson)
[© 2020 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2020 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |