Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Voters in half the country are eligible to cure disputed mail-in ballots

Mail-in ballots

Election official process mail-in ballots at the election headquarters in Salt Lake County, Utah, on Monday.

George Frey/Getty Images

More than 21 million people had submitted their midterm ballots by mail as of early Sunday morning. But those voters may not be done yet.

People who vote by mail may get a phone call, email or text message from their local election offices regarding any potential problem with their ballot. But that doesn’t necessarily mean their votes don’t count, because in many states voters may correct, or “cure” mistakes.

Here’s what you need to know.


Many states require voters to sign their mail-in or absentee ballots to confirm their identity. Election officials cross-reference these signatures with the signatures provided on an individual’s voter registration file. Problems may come in the form of a missing signature or one that does not clearly match the version on file, a not-uncommon occurrence. When that happens, states that participate in ballot curing will need to verify a voter’s identity through alternative means.

To submit a mail-in ballot, all 50 states require voters to provide a signature and follow many other requirements to ensure their ballot is properly counted. Twenty-four states follow a process that, in the event of an issue with the ballot, allows voters to correct any mistakes, an operation known as ballot curing. The remaining states will not count a ballot with disparities in signatures or other complications with identity verification.

Ballot curing is a two-step process that involves notification and correction. Depending on the state, officials will allow voters to cure their ballot in one of two ways. The first would be to submit a version of a signature verification affidavit to the local election office, as in the case of Oregon, Utah and Washington. In the alternative option, states like Minnesota, Massachusetts and Iowa will send the voter a replacement ballot to resubmit.

Made with Flourish

The turnaround for ballot curing differs on a state-by-state basis. Some states like Kentucky, Vermont and Montana require voters to cure their ballots on the day of the election. Most states that offer ballot curing provide voters with at least two days to fix any mistakes on the ballot, with the mean deadline being seven days. Since the ballot curing process varies by state, voters should check with their local election offices to determine the window for correcting ballot issues.

Pennsylvania has a complicated situation. Ballot curing only occurs in some counties, including Bucks, Philadelphia and Allegheny. Last month, the state’s Supreme Court upheld a lower court’s decision to deny an appeal by the Republican National Committee and other GOP organizations to block counties from allowing ballot curing. However, the high court just last week ordered state election officials to discard any ballots that are undated or incorrectly dated by voters. With Democrats using mail-in ballots more often than Republicans, the decision may help the GOP candidates in hard-fought races for senator and governor

While ballot curing only occurs in select states, they give voters the opportunity to have their vote counted in the event of a mistake with their ballot. If you are notified of a mistake with your ballot, check with your local election office for the correct procedure and deadline to cure your ballot.


Read More

Business meeting, blurred background and people in office for teamwork, collaboration and planning

Another recruitment drive won’t fix a nonprofit board. A practical guide to sharing real decision-making power with diverse members: acknowledge, affirm, act.

Jacob Wackerhausen/Getty Images

Before Recruiting Diverse Board Members, Examine Who Holds Power

Nonprofit leaders keep asking me where they will find the next generation of diverse board talent. My question is what those leaders will be allowed to change once they arrive. In this piece, I outline concrete steps boards can take to ensure diverse members have real opportunities to shape organizational decision-making and to translate good intentions into meaningful progress.

In my board service and consulting work, I hear the concern from executives and grassroots activists alike. They worry about recruiting successors, sustaining funding, and governing organizations whose work increasingly depends on partnerships beyond their own walls. I share those concerns. I also wonder whether another recruitment initiative will solve what troubles them.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

jimfeng/Getty Images

Pennsylvania’s Bipartisan Exchange Is Rebuilding Trust in Governance

The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics has nearly 40 years of experience working with legislators from different political parties, and it is building on this history by drawing on lessons from the successful American Congressional Exchange model, begun in 2018 at the Bipartisan Policy Center, and from state exchanges now underway in Minnesota and Michigan. The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics, in collaboration with the Bridge Alliance, has launched the Pennsylvania Legislative Exchange.

This state-based, systematic approach is designed to foster better relationships and build trust across the political aisle with the following guiding principles:

Keep ReadingShow less
Shadow on a wall of Judge hitting gavel in court, concept of justice, law, and legal protection

DOJ lawsuits in Alaska and California preview post-Election Day fights over certification and seating winners. Here’s how officials and voters can prepare.

Aitor Diago / Getty Images

The Lawsuits Will Lose. The Delays Will Still Win.

Less than two weeks before Election Day, President Trump’s Justice Department asked a federal court to stop Alaska from certifying its U.S. Senate race if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses to Democrat Mary Peltola. The lawsuit claims that a second candidate on the ballot, Daniel J. Sullivan, will confuse voters. That argument went nowhere in June, when the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that the state had no legal way to remove him from the ballot. Asked about the suit, the president took credit. “I’m the one that said do it,” he told reporters.

Alongside the Alaska suit, the Trump administration sued California to keep the state from counting mail ballots from 20,000 people it calls “likely” noncitizens. Over the summer, the Department of Homeland Security put that number at 190,000. Legal experts expect both suits to fail, as so many suits like them have. Still, Alaska and California give us an early look at what the weeks after November 3rd could bring: recount demands, calls to review or throw out ballots, and pressure to delay seating winners.

Keep ReadingShow less