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

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