Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Report finds mail voting increased in 2020, but ballot rejections did not

Poll worker processes ballots

A recent report found less than 1 percent of mail ballots were rejected, which is on par with the 2016 rate.

Jessica McGowan/Getty Images

Despite more Americans than ever opting to vote by mail in the 2020 election, a comprehensive government report found no significant increase in ballot rejections — refuting former President Donald Trump's claim that mail voting was more susceptible to fraud.

Since 2004, the Election Assistance Commission has conducted extensive biennial surveys of how Americans voted and states conducted their federal elections. The surveys also collect information about election laws, policies and practices in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and the five U.S. territories.

The 252-page report on last year's election, released Monday, provides a detailed look into how voting and election administration were impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic. The Fulcrum will break down the findings in two parts. This first installment focuses on a general election overview, as well as how state policies changed during the pandemic. And a forthcoming article will examine on voter registration and military and overseas voters.


The EAC survey confirmed last year's record-high voter turnout of 67.7 percent of citizens who are of voting age — an increase of nearly 7 percentage points from 2016. Every state and territory reported an increase in voter participation, except Puerto Rico, which saw turnout drop by 9 points. Utah saw the most improvement from 2016, jumping up 15 points to 72 percent turnout in 2020.

And along with this surge in participation, Americans also shifted the way they cast their ballots. Due to safety concerns caused by the coronavirus pandemic, voting by mail overtook in-person voting on Election Day as the most common voting method in 2020. Jurisdictions that eased their policies on mail voting, namely adopting no-excuse absentee voting and conducting all-mail elections, saw more voters use that method.

Trump and his supporters claimed this increase in mail voting would lead to more instances of voter malfeasance. However, the EAC report found that less than 1 percent of mail ballots were rejected, which is on par with the 2016 rejection rate.

The most common reason mail ballots were rejected, the report found, was the voter's signature did not match (33 percent) the signature on file. Other reasons included the voter was not eligible in that jurisdiction, the ballot was missing an affidavit, or another important document or the ballot was otherwise insufficient or compromised.

The pandemic also created a demand for poll workers who were younger and less at risk of illness than the typical elections volunteers, who tend to be 65 or older. The EAC found that, across the country, young people stepped up to meet this need.

While nearly half the poll workers last year were still over the age of 60, states did see significant increases in people under 40 volunteering to work at voting stations. States also reported that recruiting poll workers was less difficult than it was in 2016.

Covid-19 also prompted substantial changes in state voting laws and election procedures last year — some temporary and others leading to permanent adjustments. The EAC asked states to identify the 2020 policies governing voter registration, voter eligibility, modes of voting, and election audits.

Read more: How the 5 most populous states have overhauled their election systems

In addition to election policy changes, states also adapted the machinery used for voting. Checking in voters with electronic poll books has become increasingly popular, but the old-school paper system is still employed in nearly every part of the country. And last year, only 32 jurisdictions (in Indiana, Tennessee and Texas) relied solely on voting machines with no paper backup. Having a paper record of the votes cast bolsters security and makes post-election audits easier to conduct.

EAC Chairman Donald Palmer said the data collected from this report provides important insight on last year's unprecedented, pandemic-era election.

"As election officials, academics and the Congress continue to study and learn from the 2020 elections, the EAVS data will serve as a foundation for analyzing best practices and informing the future of election administration," Palmer said.


Read More

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

A woman sifts through the rubble in her house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026, in Tehran, Iran.

(Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

This question is not an exercise in double-talk. It is critical to understand the power that our Constitution grants exclusively to Congress, and the power that resides in the President as Commander-in-Chief of the military.

The Constitution clearly states that Congress has the power to declare war. The President does not have that power. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 recognizes that distribution of power by saying that a President can only introduce military force into an existing or imminent hostility if Congress has declared war or specifically authorized the President to use military force, or there is a national emergency created by an attack on the U.S.

Keep ReadingShow less
Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs
person sitting while using laptop computer and green stethoscope near

Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs

Healthcare and social assistance professions added 693,000 jobs in 2025. Without those gains, the U.S. economy would have lost roughly 570,000 jobs.

At first glance, these numbers suggest that healthcare is a growth engine in an otherwise slowing labor market. But a closer look reveals something more troubling for patients and healthcare professionals.

Keep ReadingShow less
A large group of people is depicted while invisible systems actively scan and analyze individuals within the crowd

Anthropic’s lawsuit against the Trump administration over a Pentagon “supply-chain risk” label raises major constitutional questions about AI policy, corporate speech, and political retaliation.

Getty Images, Flavio Coelho

Anthropic Sues Trump Over ‘Unlawful’ AI Retaliation

Anthropic’s dispute with the Trump administration is no longer just about AI policy; it has escalated into a constitutional test of whether American companies can uphold their values against political retaliation. After the administration labeled Anthropic a “supply‑chain risk”, a designation historically reserved for foreign adversaries, and ordered federal agencies to cease using its technology, the company did not yield. Instead, Anthropic filed two lawsuits: one in the Northern District of California and another in the D.C. Circuit, each challenging different aspects of the government’s actions and calling them “unprecedented and unlawful.”

The Pentagon has now formally issued the supply‑chain risk designation, triggering immediate cancellations of federal contracts and jeopardizing “hundreds of millions of dollars” in near‑term revenue. Anthropic’s filings describe the losses as “unrecoverable,” with reputational damage compounding the financial harm. Yet even as the government blacklists the company, the Pentagon continues using Claude in classified systems because the model is deeply embedded in wartime workflows. This contradiction underscores the political nature of the designation: a tool deemed too “dangerous” to be used by federal agencies is simultaneously indispensable in active military operations.

Keep ReadingShow less