Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

A Wisconsin do-over? Mail delaying ballots beyond Ohio's primary day

USPS worker

Due to Postal Service delays, some Ohio voters may not receive their absentee ballots in time for the primary election.

Scott Olson/Getty Images

Some Ohio voters will not receive ballots in time for Tuesday's delayed primary, which is supposed to be happening almost entirely by mail.

The Postal Service is mainly to blame, Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose said Thursday, although the problem has been compounded by the overwhelming flood of absentee ballot requests that county election boards have struggled to fulfill in time.

The primary will be the first in the country since Wisconsin's election April 7, and what happens in the next few days will determine if Ohio follows in those disastrous footsteps. Although more than 70 percent of the Wisconsin vote came in by mail, thousands risked coronavirus exposure to vote in person — many because, they said, their requested absentee ballots didn't get to them in time.


Ohio's original March 17 primary was scrapped the night before when the state declared a public health emergency. When the GOP-controlled Legislature rescheduled the election it said only the homeless and people with disabilities could vote in person.

By this week, 1.7 million Ohioans had requested a ballot. Four years ago, only 185,000 voted by mail in the primary and 1.2 million did so in the general election, or about one in five voters. (In normal circumstances, Ohioans applying to vote absentee do not need to provide an excuse.)

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Saturday is the last day for Ohioans to request an absentee ballot for the primary, creating a nearly impossibly tight turnaround for election officials and postal workers.

First-class mail, which usually arrives in one to three days, is now taking a week or longer in Ohio, LaRose said in a letter to the state's members of Congress.

"As we approach the April 28 deadline to complete the election, we are faced with an

obstacle that is outside of our control," he wrote. "As you can imagine, these delays mean it is very possible that many Ohioans who have requested a ballot may not receive it in time."

Voters without an absentee ballot in hand by Monday may cast a provisional vote the next day at their county board of elections office. A week ago, LaRose instructed county officials to provide this option. But it's not clear how that will work with social distancing requirements in place and elections staff expecting relatively small numbers of voters.

Completed mail ballots must be postmarked by Monday night and arrive within 10 days in order to be counted, or they may be delivered Tuesday to the county offices.

For a glimpse of what could lie ahead, skeptics of Ohio's process are looking to Wisconsin.

At least 183,000 ballots, or 14 percent of all those mailed to voters, had not been returned or counted a week after the election. In addition, more than 11,000 requested mail ballots were never put in the mail, the state's elections board says.

In his letter, LaRose asked for congressional intervention to direct additional staff to Ohio USPS offices, pushed for the postal service processing facilities to stay open Sunday and asked for a thorough search of mail facilities to find unprocessed mail.

Voting rights advocates warned the Legislature that its plan would not provide enough time for the absentee voting process to be carried out completely, but their subsequent lawsuits were rejected. LaRose and GOP Gov. Mike Dewine advocated for extending the time for voting to June 2.

Read More

A better direction for democracy reform

Denver election judge Eric Cobb carefully looks over ballots as counting continued on Nov. 6. Voters in Colorado rejected a ranked choice voting and open primaries measure.

Helen H. Richardson/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images

A better direction for democracy reform

Drutman is a senior fellow at New America and author "Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America."

This is the conclusion of a two-part, post-election series addressing the questions of what happened, why, what does it mean and what did we learn? Read part one.

I think there is a better direction for reform than the ranked choice voting and open primary proposals that were defeated on Election Day: combining fusion voting for single-winner elections with party-list proportional representation for multi-winner elections. This straightforward solution addresses the core problems voters care about: lack of choices, gerrymandering, lack of competition, etc., with a single transformative sweep.

Keep ReadingShow less
To-party doom loop
Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America

Let’s make sense of the election results

Drutman is a senior fellow at New America and author of "Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America."

Well, here are some of my takeaways from Election Day, and some other thoughts.

1. The two-party doom loop keeps getting doomier and loopier.

Keep ReadingShow less
Person voting in Denver

A proposal to institute ranked choice voting in Colorado was rejected by voters.

RJ Sangosti/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images

Despite setbacks, ranked choice voting will continue to grow

Mantell is director of communications for FairVote.

More than 3 million people across the nation voted for better elections through ranked choice voting on Election Day, as of current returns. Ranked choice voting is poised to win majority support in all five cities where it was on the ballot, most notably with an overwhelming win in Washington, D.C. – 73 percent to 27 percent.

Keep ReadingShow less
Electoral College map

It's possible Donald Trump and Kamala Harris could each get 269 electoral votes this year.

Electoral College rules are a problem. A worst-case tie may be ahead.

Johnson is the executive director of the Election Reformers Network, a national nonpartisan organization advancing common-sense reforms to protect elections from polarization. Keyssar is a Matthew W. Stirling Jr. professor of history and social policy at the Harvard Kennedy School. His work focuses on voting rights, electoral and political institutions, and the evolution of democracies.

It’s the worst-case presidential election scenario — a 269–269 tie in the Electoral College. In our hyper-competitive political era, such a scenario, though still unlikely, is becoming increasingly plausible, and we need to grapple with its implications.

Recent swing-state polling suggests a slight advantage for Kamala Harris in the Rust Belt, while Donald Trump leads in the Sun Belt. If the final results mirror these trends, Harris wins with 270 electoral votes. But should Trump take the single elector from Nebraska’s 2nd congressional district — won by Joe Biden in 2020 and Trump in 2016 — then both candidates would be deadlocked at 269.

Keep ReadingShow less