Restricting no-excuse absentee voting and banning drop boxes won't actually improve election integrity, despite the claims of many conservatives, according to a new study.
R Street Institute, a right-leaning public policy research organization, released a five-page report this week arguing against various state proposals aimed at restricting voting access. While the report says some proposed reforms deserve serious deliberation, others will only make it harder for people to vote.
More Americans than ever cast a ballot by mail in the 2020 election due to the Covid-19 pandemic, prompting some states to consider making no-excuse absentee voting and other ballot expansions permanent policies. However, 33 state legislatures are also considering more than 165 bills that would restrict voting access.
Before the pandemic, two-thirds of states allowed voters to cast absentee ballots for any reason and several more made temporary allowances last fall. Only five states (Texas, Louisiana, Tennessee, Indiana and Mississippi) kept the excuse requirement for voting by mail in the 2020 election.
While former President Donald Trump's baseless claims of voting fraud connected to mailed ballots during and after the election have caused many Republican lawmakers to now seek rollbacks or restrictions on voting access, those allegations have no basis in fact, according to R Street.
The report points out that absentee ballots face a "rigorous process to ensure ballots are legitimate, including ballot tracking measures and signature verification." R Street also cites an election fraud database run by the conservative Heritage Foundation, which has found a miniscule number of fraud cases over multiple election cycles.
"Moving to an excuse-only absentee system would do nothing to combat fraud, and may instead suppress voter turnout," wrote Steven Greenhut and Marc Hyden, two state policy experts at R Street who authored the report. "Many Americans prefer the convenience and flexibility provided by no-excuse absentee voting."
Ballot drop boxes, an extension of mail voting, have also been under attack. Eliminating their availability would also hinder voter convenience, especially given the mail delivery delays last fall, the report says.
"Ironically, many Republicans questioned the ability of the U.S. Postal Service to handle something as important as a ballot, yet are now proposing rules that would eliminate a reasonable alternative," Greenhut and Hyden wrote.
Expanding absentee voting is good reform and not an invitation for fraud, the report concludes. "Instead of seeking to ban tried-and-true methods of voting, lawmakers should instead look to ensure that eligible voters have the utmost opportunity to safely exercise their voting rights."
U.S. President Donald Trump boards Air Force One on August 14, 2026 at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland. Trump is traveling to Long Island to tour law enforcement facilities in Nassau County and rally support for local Republican candidates ahead of the upcoming midterm elections
Travel Far Enough, You Meet Yourself
Is it possible that our President has simply not traveled enough?
Born and raised in Queens and attending Fordham University in the Bronx, Donald Trump has no record of traveling outside New York until he was over 20, when he transferred to a college in the neighboring state of Pennsylvania. Were his formative years amiss, then, in his learning about other places and other people?
Is his view akin to the famous New Yorker cover by Saul Steinberg, an illustration of the United States with New York City as the epicenter of the country and the Hudson River the border of the known world? We can now at least add Washington, D.C., and Mar-a-Lago to the map of “the realm.”
Our President has now traveled some, but what we recommend is another kind of travel. Not a state-sponsored trip or a venture to scout locations for future Trump Towers. This would be a genuine travel experience, enriching and eye-opening, showcasing other cultures and ways of living.
It will extend far beyond viewing military parades, hobnobbing with such “understanding” world leaders as Kim Jong Un, or taking tea with the King.
WHERE, then, should the President go? As Elon Musk’s Starship spacecraft is not yet ready to take passengers to Mars, perhaps he could explore our own vast country?
Maybe he could travel to “flyover country,” the farming states, where his ying-yanging tariffs and trade restrictions have played havoc with rural economies. Or possibly to California, number one in homeless U. S. citizens, and while there, regale homeless veterans (approximately 32,500 nationwide) with tales of his brave exploits invading and bombing foreign countries.
Or he might tour the Great Lakes, and rename the other four?
WHEN should he go? This will be tough, as he is very busy building his ballroom and renaming bodies of water.
How about a trip in early November, around the midterm elections? Despite the long-discredited accusation of widespread voter fraud, it would be reassuring to know he might be so caught up divvying out ladles of soup in a soup kitchen somewhere that he wouldn’t remember to deploy the military for “election security.”
HOW will he travel? He should definitely not take his Qatari-donated, newly renovated 747, especially after last time, when he had to be smuggled off clandestinely in a catering truck. It’s unlikely any traveling companions, like the Secretary of State or of the Treasury, are going to fall for the ruse a second time. Besides, we may need those people. No more decoys!
Perhaps the President could fly commercially, although this likely would expose him to undue suffering. Without gold bathroom fixtures and maple wood floors, the trip will be no “Luxury Experience.” If only he still had his “Trump Shuttle,” bought with a massive loan he later defaulted on, saying then, “I’m smart. I got out at a good time.”
Considering the potential pitfalls, maybe it’s best the President travel incognito, disguised perhaps as an elderly woman wearing a lot of bronzer.
Wherever, whenever, however: our President needs a vacation.
Moreover, we need a vacation from him.
If the President refuses our travel suggestions, here’s another idea:
Let’s get him a pet! He has never owned a pet. As we know with our children, pets teach essential life lessons: compassion and empathy; they instill a sense of responsibility. There is a well-established connection between those who can care for a pet and those who can care for people.
So, which pet should we choose? A puppy? A kitten? A boa constrictor?
Imagine, the President may even decide he likes having a pet. After all, what is more obedient than a well-trained dog, besides possibly the Cabinet? And what is more docile than a sweet kitten, other than plausibly the Supreme Court?
The President may even become more mellow with a pet afoot and less likely to slap tariffs on our allies, or attempt to annex our neighbors, or bully our Congress. (Realizing, of course, a bully requires active participation from the bullied to maintain his status.)
Maybe we should do both: get the President a pet and devise a travel plan for him. (Do you think we could possibly convince him to leave his phone at home?)
Let’s go for it! After all:
Travel far enough, you meet yourself. (David Mitchell)
And for our President, that would likely be the most profound discovery of all.
Amy Lockard is an Iowa resident who regularly contributes to regional newspapers and periodicals. She is working on the second of a four-book fictional series based on Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice."