Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Voting prep, part 3: Voting by mail

vote by mail
Joe Raedle/Getty Images

The Fulcrum is publishing a series of articles to help people navigate the shifting laws that govern elections. This, the third article, covers the deadlines for voting by mail.

Two years ago, with the Covid-19 pandemic raging across the country, 43 percent of voters cast their ballots by mail – a massive increase over prior elections.

Now that people have a taste for it, and with more states either switching to all mail elections or loosening the restrictions on absentee ballots, we can expect to see a large percentage choose that option this year.

But voters who do opt to vote by mail need to be aware of not one but two deadlines: first, to apply for a mail-in ballot and, second, when to submit the ballot in order for it to be counted. We’ve done the work for you.


While “absentee” and “mailed” ballots are often lumped into the same category of voting, as they both use the postal system, there are some differences. Absentee ballots may require a more formal application in which the voters need to specify the reasoning for using such a ballot (such as being away from home for college, work or military service, or due to health concerns or disabilities). Vote-by-mail may have only referred to the states that generally do not have in-person voting.

However, since the outbreak of the pandemic, mailed ballots have become a much more popular choice to cast a ballot and have become synonymous with absentee ballots. And a number of states that required a reason to use an absentee ballot have become “no excuse” states, allowing anyone to request such a ballot.

Made with Flourish

If you live in one of the eight states that proactively send all voters a mail-in ballot (California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Vermont and Washington), you do not need to worry about the application deadline – unless you have updated your address. Utah, for example, required such notices to be filed 11 days before the election.

Similarly, California, Colorado, Hawaii and Oregon require updates to mailing locations to be submitted five to eight days out.

Mississippi, New Hampshire, and North Dakota do not have a specific deadline for which an absentee ballot application needs to be received; however, Vote.org recommends requesting the ballot seven days before Election Day.

Seven states — Wyoming, Delaware, Vermont, South Dakota, Montana, Minnesota, and Connecticut — have received-by deadlines of one day before Election Day for absentee applications or updates, the most forgiving out of all the states. Once again, Vote.org recommends applying for an absentee ballot at least seven days before the election.

Every other state has mailed ballot application deadlines spanning between a month before Election Day to three days before people hit the in-person polls. Check with your state for specific deadlines.

Additional reading:

Once voters have submitted their absentee ballot applications, they then must focus on the deadline for returning the ballot to election officials. Many states — such as Rhode Island, New Mexico, Nebraska and Kentucky — require mail-in ballots to be received by sometime on Election Day.

Others like Florida, Alabama and Minnesota have different same-day deadlines for mailing absentee ballots rather than delivering them by hand. Depending on the state, voters will have an earlier receive-by time for in-person delivered ballots compared to mailed ballots, or the reverse.

North Dakota, Ohio and Alaska, among others, choose to emphasize the postmarked date and will honor the ballot when received by a specified date after Election Day. For example, California requires mailed ballots to be postmarked by Election Day and received no later than seven days after the election. New Jersey requires postmarked ballots to be received 144 hours after polls close.

No two states have the same procedure so it is always important to double check with your state to be informed of with their voting system.

The Voting Rights Lab has created a resource for tracking changes to vote-by-mail policies in each state.

Read More

Poll: 82% of Americans Want Redistricting Done by Independent Commission, Not Politicians

Capitol building, Washington, DC

Unsplash/Getty Images

Poll: 82% of Americans Want Redistricting Done by Independent Commission, Not Politicians

There may be no greater indication that voters are not being listened to in the escalating redistricting war between the Republican and Democratic Parties than a new poll from NBC News that shows 8-in-10 Americans want the parties to stop.

It’s what they call an "80-20 issue," and yet neither party is standing up for the 80% as they prioritize control of Congress.

Keep ReadingShow less
Nationalization by Stealth: Trump’s New Industrial Playbook

The White House and money

AI generated image

Nationalization by Stealth: Trump’s New Industrial Playbook

In the United States, where the free market has long been exalted as the supreme engine of prosperity, a peculiar irony is taking shape. On August 22, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick announced that the federal government had acquired a stake of just under 10% in Intel, instantly making itself the company’s largest shareholder. The stake - roughly 433 million shares, valued at about $8.9 billion, purchased at $20.47 each - was carved out of the Biden-era CHIPS Act subsidies and repackaged as equity. Formally, it is a passive, non-voting stake, with no board seat or governance rights. Yet symbolism matters: Washington now sits, however discreetly, in Intel’s shareholder register. Soon afterward, reports emerged that Samsung, South Korea’s industrial giant, had also been considered for similar treatment. What once would have been denounced as creeping socialism in Washington is now unfolding under Donald Trump, a president who boasts of his devotion to private enterprise but increasingly embraces tactics that blur the line between capitalism and state control.

The word “nationalization,” for decades associated with postwar Britain, Latin American populists, or Arab strongmen, is suddenly back in circulation - but this time applied to the citadel of capitalism itself. Trump justifies the intervention as a matter of national security and economic patriotism. Subsidies, he argues, are wasteful. Tariffs, in his view, are a stronger tool for forcing corporations to relocate factories to U.S. soil. Yet the CHIPS Act, that bipartisan legacy of the Biden years, remains in force and politically untouchable, funneling billions of dollars into domestic semiconductor projects. Rather than scrap it, Trump has chosen to alter the terms: companies that benefit from taxpayer largesse must now cede equity to the state. Intel, heavily reliant on those funds, has become the test case for this new model of American industrial policy.

Keep ReadingShow less