Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Mail-in balloting surged last month. Don't let that ease your worries.

Ohio primary voters

Eligible voters cast ballots at the Franklin County Board of Elections headquarters in Ohio. The state allowed one in-person voting location per county for the April primary.

Matthew Hatcher/Getty Images

Burden is a professor of political science and director of the Elections Research Center at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.


Something remarkable happened in Ohio and Wisconsin this spring. While other states with presidential primaries scheduled for last month decided to postpone or modify them, the Buckeye State and Badger State held theirs.

Their approaches differed in important ways, but together they provide urgent lessons as the entire country plans for the general election in November.

In the middle of a pandemic, more than 1.5 million Wisconsinites voted in their primary. Although more than 70 percent of voters cast absentee ballots, viral photos of voters wearing masks and waiting in long lines painted a vivid picture. Ohio took a different approach, extending voting by six weeks for a primary originally scheduled in March and eliminating all polling places aside from limited voting and drop boxes at each county board of elections. As a result, nearly everyone voted by mail.

Heavy absentee voting was the only way these elections could have taken place. The massive increase in voting by mail in both states is certain to make absentee voting a more regular part of future elections. But that does not mean that voting during the pandemic has been figured out. Even though absentee voting proved popular during the crisis, most states have a lot of work ahead if they want to be ready for a mail-centric election for president in November.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

For starters, neither state managed to execute a flawless election. It appears that a significant number of voters who requested absentee ballots never received them. Other voters received their ballots, but got them too late to mail them back by the deadline.

In Wisconsin, some voters had difficulty requesting absentee ballots in the first place because such requests require a photo or copy of an acceptable ID such as a driver's license or passport. The absentee ballot envelope in Wisconsin also requires the signature of a witness, a challenging requirement for people who live alone or are intentionally isolating to avoid spread of the coronavirus.

The long lines on primary day in Wisconsin were a tragedy, but we should not cheer their absence in Ohio too quickly. The state eliminated traditional polling places and only permitted limiting voting at one location per county, much of which was done by dropping off completed ballots. This system was helpful but surely did not serve all of the people who lacked the time and resources to travel to the county seat on election day. Wiping out polling places made the election process safer but also made those problems for some voters invisible.

In contrasting ways, these states demonstrated the need to retain physical polling places. Even with a stay-at-home order in place, hundreds of thousands of Wisconsin voters went outside to vote in person. In some cities, the consolidation of polling places produced long lines. In Milwaukee the reduction of 180 polling places to just five sites produced lines that ran for blocks and took hours to navigate. No voter should ever have to suffer that experience.

We also have yet to know how many absentee ballots were actually counted. Studies from other states with moderate use of absentee voting show that younger voters and non-white voters are more likely to have their ballots go uncounted for a variety of reasons.

States with extensive mail-based voting systems gradually developed systems to make it work. Colorado and Washington work aggressively to keep voter registration lists up to date so that mailing addresses are as current as possible. Some states provide carefully placed public drop boxes because many, if not most, voters prefer to deposit their ballots in these dedicated boxes rather than rely on the Postal Service. These states have also developed forgiving processes for voters to "cure" a ballot that arrives without a signature or is not properly sealed. It took significant time and money to make this infrastructure possible.

The volume of absentee ballot requests overwhelmed some local election officials, especially in more populous communities. Imagine the volume of ballots for the November election, when turnout in many states could be twice what it was in the primary. States will need to spend significantly to make sure staffing and supplies are adequate for handling the flow of requests and returned ballots.

It is startling just how far Ohio and Wisconsin moved toward mail voting in such a short time, weeks rather than months. An unprecedented health and economic crisis can apparently do a lot to grease the gears. But it certainly does not mean that a state is ready to run an election completely by mail in November.

Read More

Members of Congress in the House of Representatives

Every four years, Congress gathers to count electoral votes.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

No country still uses an electoral college − except the U.S.

Holzer is an associate professor of political science at Westminster College.

The United States is the only democracy in the world where a presidential candidate can get the most popular votes and still lose the election. Thanks to the Electoral College, that has happened five times in the country’s history. The most recent examples are from 2000, when Al Gore won the popular vote but George W. Bush won the Electoral College after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, and 2016, when Hillary Clinton got more votes nationwide than Donald Trump but lost in the Electoral College.

The Founding Fathers did not invent the idea of an electoral college. Rather, they borrowed the concept from Europe, where it had been used to pick emperors for hundreds of years.

Keep ReadingShow less
Nebraska Capitol

Nebraska's Capitol houses a unicameral legislature, unique in American politics.

Education Images/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

100 years ago, a Nebraska Republican fought for democracy reform

Gruber is senior vice president of Open Primaries.

With Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen’s announcement on Sept. 24 that he doesn't have enough votes to call a special session of the Legislature to change the way the state allocates electoral votes, an effort led by former President Donald Trump to pressure the Legislature officially failed.

Nebraska is one of only two states that award a single Electoral College vote to the winner in each congressional district, plus two votes to the statewide winner of the presidential popular vote. Much has been made — justifiably — of Republican state Sen. Mike McDonnell’s heroic decision to buck enormous political pressure from his party to fall in line, and choosing instead to single-handedly defeat the measure. The origins of the senator's independence, though, began in a 100-old experiment in democracy reform.

Keep ReadingShow less
Man sitting in a chair near voting stations

An election official staffs a voting location in Lansing, Mich., during the state's Aug. 6, primary.

Emily Elconin for The Washington Post via Getty Images

Closed primaries, gerrymandering eliminate competition for House seats

Meyers is executive editor of The Fulcrum.

There are 435 voting members of the House of Representatives. But few of those districts — 55, to be exact — will be decided on Election Day, according to new data from the nonprofit organization Unite America. That’s because the vast majority of races were effectively decided during the primaries.

The research data goes deep into what Unite America calls the “Primary Problem,” in which few Americans are determining winners of House elections.

Keep ReadingShow less
House chamber

Rep. Scott Perry objects to Pennsylvania's certification of its Electoral College vote during a joint session of Congress on Jan. 7, 2021.

Kent Nishimura/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

What voters need to know about the presidential election

Becvar is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and executive director of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund. Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

It is quite clear that the presidential election is going to be incredibly close. In each of the seven swing states, the margin of error is less than 2 percent.

As citizens, this is not something to fear and it is critically important that we all trust the election results.

As part of our ongoing series for the Election Overtime Project, today we present a guide explaining in detail what you, as a voter, need to know about the role of state legislatures and Congress in a presidential election. The guide was prepared by the Election Reformers Network, a nonprofit organization championing impartial elections and concrete policy solutions that strengthen American democracy.

Keep ReadingShow less