mail-in ballots – birdpuk

June 29, 2021June 29, 2021

Supreme Court Likely To Issue Major Ruling on Ballot Harvesting Soon

Election workers count ballots in Philadelphia, Penn., on Nov. 4, 2020. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

The Supreme Court is poised to issue a major ruling that could impact the practice of “ballot harvesting” across the United States.

The court’s current term is slated to expire at the end of this month, which is this Thursday, and it is likely to rule on a voting rights case that calls into question Arizona’s law that bans ballot harvesting, or the practice of collecting ballots for delivery. Also under consideration is the state’s law that mandates the dismissal of ballots that were cast in the wrong voting district.

After the Democratic National Committee filed a lawsuit against the laws, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the Democrats and overturned them. Later, Arizona state Attorney General Mark Brnovich, a Republican, appealed that decision to the Supreme Court.

The GOP-controlled Arizona Legislature passed a ballot harvesting bill in 2016that made the practice—typically carried out by Democratic-aligned groups—of going door-to-door asking people to take their ballots to a local polling place unlawful. The law makes exceptions for family members, caregivers, and people living in the same household. Republicans have said this would eliminate fraud and other irregularities.

In a divided ruling, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals’s majority argued that the law was a bid to suppress minority voters.

“The district court found that, in contrast, the Republican Party has not significantly engaged in ballot collection as a Get Out the Vote strategy,” Justice William Fletcher wrote for the majority last year. “The base of the Republican Party in Arizona is white,” Fletcher added. “Individuals who engaged in ballot collection in past elections observed that voters in predominantly white areas were not as interested in ballot-collection services.”

However, Brnovich argued (pdf) to the Supreme Court that the law barely impacted minority groups’ ability to vote and cited “slight statistical differences.”

“No one was denied the opportunity,” he said in his arguments before the court.

Brnovich further stipulated there are a “plethora of options” for voters to cast ballots in elections, saying that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals used that small statistical difference and then “tried to extrapolate that somehow that Arizona’s laws were racist or unconstitutional.”

Michael Carvin, an attorney for the Arizona GOP, said during questioning that the law creates difficulties for Republicans during elections.

“It puts us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats,” he told Justice Amy Coney Barrett. “Politics is a zero-sum game. And every extra vote they get through unlawful interpretations of Section 2 hurts us. It’s the difference between winning an election 50 to 49 and losing an election.”

Source: Supreme Court Likely To Issue Major Ruling on Ballot Harvesting Soon

March 11, 2021

90,000 Ballots in Largest Nevada County Sent to Wrong Addresses, Bounced Back: Report

Clark County Election Department worker puts mail-in ballots collected from vehicles in a ballot box at the Clark County Election Department in North Las Vegas, Nev., on Oct. 13, 2020. (Ethan Miller/Getty Images)

More than 90,000 ballots mailed to registered voters in Nevada’s largest county were returned undeliverable, according to an analysis of election data by a conservative legal group.

Clark County, which includes the Las Vegas metro area, made the extraordinary move to mail ballots before the November general election to all the nearly 1.3 million active voters in the county, instead of just those who requested them. The county justified the move as helping people vote remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic.

More than 450,000 voters cast their votes through the mail-in ballots. But more than 92,000 ballots were returned by the postal service as undeliverable, according to the Public Interest Legal Foundation’s (PILF) March 10 research brief (pdf).

The number is based on data provided in February by Clark County Voter Registrar Joe Gloria, the brief says. The Clark County Election Office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

“Mass-mail balloting is a step backward for American elections. There are millions of voter registration records with unreliable ‘active’ address information that will ultimately send ballots to the wrong place in a mail election,” PILF President J. Christian Adams said in the brief.

Prior to the election, PILF criticized such mass ballot mailings in states that hadn’t had such systems already in place.

The entire state of Nevada reported only 5,863 mail ballots returned undeliverable in the 2012, 2014, 2016, and 2018 General Elections combined, the brief says, referring to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission surveys.

Adams also took aim at the H.R. 1 election reform bill that was recently passed by the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives.

The nearly 800-page bill would largely shift power over elections to the federal government. It would discard state voter-ID laws, allow for same-day voter registration, ban witness signature requirements for mail-in ballots, and require that mail-in ballots can arrive as late as 10 days after election day (as long as it is post stamped by election day). It would also make it a federal crime to “communicate or cause to be communicated” information that is knowingly false and designed to discourage voting and require a plethora of other measures.

Conservatives have made it their priority to oppose the bill.

“H.R. 1 does more harm than good for the American people and will leave them at a constant disadvantage to correct election system errors which ultimately impact their abilities to vote in a timely manner,” Adams said.

The bill “basically codifies everything that was irregular or outright wrong or the opportunities for fraud during last year’s election and makes it the law of the land,” Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita recently told Breitbart News.

Source: 90,000 Ballots in Largest Nevada County Sent to Wrong Addresses, Bounced Back: Report

March 6, 2021March 6, 2021

Key Things You Need to Know About HR 1, the For the People Act of 2021

Residents drop mail-in ballots in a ballot box outside of the Tippecanoe branch library in Milwaukee, Wis., on Oct. 20, 2020. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)

On Wednesday, Democrats in the House passed H.R. 1, the For the People Act of 2021, which was introduced by Rep. John Sarbanes (D-Md.). The election reform package, if passed by the Senate, would transfer authority over how elections are administered from states to the federal government, subject private citizens, to intimidation and harassment for their private and political beliefs, and make permanent many voting rules that opponents say lead to voter fraud.

The 791 page-long H.R. 1 legislation package, which was marked up by members of the 116th Congress, was adopted without much debate. Some provisions, like ensuring that all voting machines used in U.S. elections are also manufactured in the United States or increasing access for voters with disabilities, are supported by both sides, but most other provisions are contentious.

The sweeping election reform package is divided into three major sections; the second section is the main body of the legislation, with three subsections: a) Voting, b) Campaign Finance, and c) Ethics. Section three is the Findings of General Constitutional Authority and section four is the Standards for Judicial Review.

These are some of the key changes to election laws in H.R. 1:

Gives the federal government authority to administer elections: Although the U.S. Constitution gives states the authority to run their elections as they see fit, Democrats have interpreted the Constitution in their favor, stating in H.R. 1, “Congress finds that it has broad authority to regulate the time, place, and manner of congressional elections under the Elections Clause of the Constitution, Article I, section 4.”
Limits a plaintiff’s access to federal courts when challenging H.R. 1: It would mandate that any lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of H.R. 1 could only be filed in the District Court for the District of Columbia and all plaintiffs would be required “to file joint papers or to be represented by a single attorney at oral argument.”
Mandates automatic voter registration (AVR) in all 50 states (19 states currently have AVR): Democrats call this “modernizing” elections, meaning automatically registering any person that has given information to designated government agencies, such as the Department of Motor Vehicles, a public university, or a social service agency would be registered. It mandates same-day and online registration.
Mandates no-fault absentee ballots: This provision would do away with witness signature or notarization requirements for absentee ballots. Additionally, it would force states to accept absentee ballots received up to 10 days after Election Day.
Prevents election officials from removing ineligible voters from registries or confirming the eligibility and qualifications of voters: The bill would make it illegal to verify the address of registered voters, cross-checking voter registration lists to find individuals registered in multiple states, or ever removing registrants no matter how much time has elapsed.
Restores the Voting Rights Act: This provision would require states to obtain approval from the federal government before implementing any voting rules changes. H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting.
Bans state voter ID laws: It would force states to allow individuals to vote without an ID and instead they could merely sign a statement in which they claim they are who they say they are.
Ensures illegal immigrants can vote: The bill would shield non-citizens from prosecution if they are registered to vote automatically and agencies are not required to keep records of who declined to affirm their citizenship.
Allows same-day voter registration: “Each State shall permit any eligible individual on the day of a Federal election and on any day when voting, including early voting, is permitted for a Federal election—to register to vote in such election at the polling place … [and] to cast a vote in such election.” The section includes a clause that requires same-day voter registration to be implemented in time for the upcoming elections in 2022.
Requires registration for those under 18: “States to carry out a plan to increase the involvement of individuals under 18 years of age in public election activities in the State.”
Prohibits the publication of “misleading information” about elections: The bill makes it a federal crime to “communicate or cause to be communicated information” that is knowingly false, and designed to discourage voting, carrying with it a sentence of up to five years.
Allows felons to vote: It limits federal dollars to prisons of those states who do not register ex-convicts to vote. The provision is called the “Democracy Restoration Act.” The bill says that all felons can vote unless they are “serving a felony sentence in a correctional institution or facility at the time of the election.”
Mandates early voting: “Each State shall allow individuals to vote in an election for Federal office during an early voting period which occurs prior to the date of the election, in the same manner as voting is allowed on such date.”
Legalizes nationwide vote-by-mail, without photo ID: States are required to provide for absentee vote-by-mail in elections for Federal offices and “may not require an individual to provide any form of identification as a condition of obtaining an absentee ballot.” A witness signature will not be required.
Promotes ballot harvesting: The bill says states “shall permit a voter to designate any person to return a voted and sealed absentee ballot to the post office, a ballot drop-off location, tribally designated building, or election office so long as the person designated to return the ballot does not receive any form of compensation based on the number of ballots” and ” may not put any limit on how many voted and sealed absentee ballots any designated person can return.”
Requires states to accept ballots 10 days after Election Day: The bill requires states to accept any mailed ballots postmarked before, or on, Election Day if they arrive within 10 days of the election. It allows states to expand that deadline.
Prohibits state election officials from campaigning in federal elections: The bill bans “a chief State election administration official to take an active part in political management or in a political campaign with respect to any election for Federal office over which such official has supervisory authority.”
Requires “Campus Vote Coordinators” at higher institutes of learning: The bill would require colleges and universities to hire an official whose responsibility would be to inform students about elections and encourage voter registration. It would incentivize voter registration by giving grants to institutions that have a high registration rate.
Mandates that states make absentee voter boxes available for 45 days within an election: “In each county in the State, each State shall provide in-person, secured, and clearly labeled drop boxes at which individuals may, at any time during the period described in subsection (b), drop off voted absentee ballots in an election for Federal office.” These boxes should be “available to all voters on a non-discriminatory basis” and “during all hours of the day.”
Requires curbside voting: States may not “prohibit any jurisdiction administering an election for Federal office in the State from utilizing curbside voting as a method by which individuals may cast ballots in the election.”
Urges D.C. statehood and representation for territories: The bill complains that D.C. is not yet a state, adding, “The United States is the only democratic country that denies both voting representation in the national legislature and local self-government to the residents of its Nation’s capital.” The bill also appoints a commission that would advocate for congressional representation and presidential votes.
Requires that “independent” congressional district commissions be set up: Taking power away from the state legislature, but evidence shows that “independent” redistricting commissions are in truth run by Democrats for their advantage.
Creates a “National Commission to Protect United States Democratic Institutions.”: The commission would study elections and produce a report after 18 months with recommendations for improving elections but would consist of 10 members, only four of whom would be selected by the minority party, giving the majority (Democrat) party control.
Mandates new disclosure for corporations: The bill codifies the Democrats’ DISCLOSE Act, to restrict corporate participation in elections. Democrats say this provision will shed light on dark money. Republicans counter that the legislation’s transparency requirements would violate free speech rights.
Oversight of online political advertising: The provision called the “Stand By Every Ad Act” would stop campaign dollars from covering any form of advertising over the Internet. Opponents say this would increase the cost of campaigning.
Weakens the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United, calling it “erroneous”: “The Supreme Court’s misinterpretation of the Constitution to empower monied interests at the expense of the American people in elections has seriously eroded over 100 years of congressional action to promote fairness and protect elections from the toxic influence of money.” It goes further to suggest “the Constitution should be amended so that Congress and the States may regulate and set limits on the raising and spending of money.”
Allows politicians to use campaign funds for personal use: Under a provision called the “Help America Run Act,” the bill legalizes the use of campaign donations for personal expenses such as child care.
Changes the composition of the FEC: The bill would decrease the number of the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) members from six to five. Four members can be associated with a particular political party, making the fifth member “independent” but who would be nominated by a president associated with a party. Former FEC members have written to Congress, warning about this change and other related provisions.
Changes rules “around conflicts of interest” for the president and vice president: It would require the president or vice president to divest all financial interests that could pose a conflict of interest for them, their families, or anyone with whom they are negotiating or who is seeking employment in their administration.
Changes FEC rules to require presidential candidates to provide their tax returns: The bill states, “Not later than the date that is 15 days after the date on which an individual becomes a covered candidate, the individual shall submit to the Federal Election Commission a copy of the individual’s income tax returns for the 10 most recent taxable years for which a return has been filed with the Internal Revenue Service.”

Source: Key Things You Need to Know About HR 1, the For the People Act of 2021

January 29, 2021January 29, 2021

Democrats Introduce Bill to ‘Massively Expand’ Mail-in Voting

Democrat lawmakers on Thursday introduced a bill dubbed the “Vote at Home Act,” which seeks to “massively expand vote-at-home ballot access,” enacting automatic voter registration and providing voters with pre-paid ballot envelopes.

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) introduced the bill (pdf), saying in a press release that the legislation is meant to “fight voter suppression.”

“Our democracy is stronger when every American can vote, without standing in ridiculous lines or having to take time off work or school to exercise their Constitutional rights,” Wyden said in a statement.

The initiative stands in contrast to a bill introduced by Republicans several weeks ago, which seeks to tighten voter registration verifications and narrow rules for when and how mail-in ballots can be accepted, in a bid to strengthen the integrity of federal elections.

The Democrat lawmakers said the introduction of the bill was encouraged by what they described as “the successful expansion of voting at home and by mail in the November 2020 election,” in which almost 50 percent of voters cast ballots by mail, a record high in federal races.

“Last year we saw a widespread expansion of vote-at-home access as a safe and secure way to participate during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Blumenauer said in a statement. “We should continue to make voting easier, not harder. This important bill would strengthen and clarify the right to vote at home, the most secure and convenient way for voters to exercise the franchise.”

Critics of expanding vote-by-mail initiatives have warned of the increased potential for voter fraud, allegations of which were front and center in the contested presidential election, with President Donald Trump, members of his legal team, and supporters, making numerous claims that amounted to the charge that the election was stolen.

Peter Navarro, who served as an adviser to Trump, concluded in a sweeping report on the integrity of the 2020 election that the allegations of irregularities, including outright voter fraud, were serious enough to warrant an urgent probe and substantial enough to potentially overturn the results.

State election officials, the Justice Department, and others rejected the notion that there was widespread voter fraud in the November election.

The Democrats’ “Vote at Home Act” stipulates a range of actions that would expand vote by mail in federal elections.

“All registered voters would receive ballots in the mail weeks before Election Day, allowing them to carefully research candidates and issues well ahead of Election Day to inform their vote,” the press release states.

The bill would also grant all registered voters nationwide the ability to cast their ballots by mail or at ballot drop boxes. The act also calls for increased funding for the U.S. Postal Service to cover costs associated with processing ballots.

“This would allow states to save money by transitioning away from polling stations and reduce a major barrier for voters with the federal government absorbing the cost associated with USPS delivery,” the press release notes.

Under the provisions of the bill, states would also be required to automatically register voters when they provide identifying information to the state motor vehicle authority. Voters who do not want to remain registered would be given three weeks to opt out.

The House Republican bill, meanwhile, called the “Save Democracy Act,” seeks to create baseline protections against election irregularities and voter fraud during elections.

The GOP initiative seeks to prevent automatic voter registration for federal elections, prohibits states from sending out unrequested absentee ballots, and calls for a ban on using public ballot collection boxes.

Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), said in a press statement, “This bill will restore the public’s trust that their vote is counted and their voice is heard.”

Source: Democrats Introduce Bill to ‘Massively Expand’ Mail-in Voting

January 24, 2021

Amazon Trying to Block Voting by Mail in Unionization Election – Double Standards?

Amazon is seeking to block mail-in votes in an upcoming unionization vote.

Workers at a warehouse in Bessemer, Alabama, are scheduled to vote soon on whether to unionize, with ballots being sent out on Feb. 8. The National Labor Relations Board said earlier this month that the vote would take place entirely by mail because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“A mail ballot election will enfranchise employees who cannot enter the voting location for health reasons or due to positive COVID tests,” the board said in its ruling. “In addition, a mail ballot election will protect the health and safety of voters, Agency personnel, the parties’ representatives, and the public during the current health crisis.”

Amazon filed a motion on Jan. 21 that seeks to delay the election so it can take place in person, with no votes by mail.

In a filing, the company said the board’s decision doesn’t specify what constitutes an outbreak. The board’s acting regional director, Amazon added, “reached the remarkable conclusion that any level of infection or potential infection among employees counts as an ‘outbreak.’”

Approximately 2.9 percent of Amazon’s 7,575 employees and third-party workers tested positive for COVID-19 in the two weeks ending on Jan. 7, Amazon said. The company contests that that percentage doesn’t constitute an outbreak.

If it does, then “facilities will be in a constant state of ‘outbreak’ unless and until the virus all but disappears, with no manual elections occurring until that unknown time,” Amazon said in a filing, alleging an election by mail could “disenfranchise dozens or hundreds of voters.”

COVID-19 is the disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

“We believe that the best approach to a valid, fair and successful election is one that is conducted manually, in-person,” an Amazon spokesperson told news outlets. “We will continue to insist on measures for a fair election, and we want everyone to vote, so our focus is ensuring that’s possible.”

The board didn’t respond to a request for comment. In a statement last year, it said its policy strongly favors in-person elections but said approximately 90 percent of votes since March 2020 have taken place by mail because of the pandemic.

If one of six unique circumstances are present in a facility, then a remote vote would be ordered, the board decided. Those circumstances include a current COVID-19 outbreak at a facility, an increase in the 14-day trend of new confirmed COVID-19 cases, and an inability to carry out an in-person election that abides by mandatory state or local health orders.

The vote at the Bessemer warehouse is slated to be the first unionization vote in an Amazon facility since 2014. A group of Amazon workers in Delaware voted that year not to join a union.

Amazon’s owner is Jeff Bezos, one of the richest men in the world. The second-largest employer in the United States has struggled with worker safety. The National Council for Occupational Safety and Health regularly lists Amazon among the most unsafe workplaces in the country.

“Six worker deaths in seven months; 13 deaths since 2013. Reports of a high incidence of suicide attempts; workers urinating in bottles and workers left without resources or income after on-the-job injuries,” the council said in 2019.

This year’s unionization vote is to join the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union. The union declined to comment. It has not publicly remarked on the scheduled vote, though it linked to an article about the situation on its website.

Organizers of the unionization effort and Amazon set up competing sites to make their cases.

Organizers said having a union “would give us the right to collectively bargain over our working conditions including items such as safety standards, training, breaks, pay, benefits, and other important issues that would make our workplace better.”

“Amazon sometimes addresses issues at work but it’s all temporary,” they said. “A union contract is in writing, negotiated upon, and Amazon would need to legally follow the guidelines and there are mechanisms to hold them legally accountable to us as workers. There’s no other way to have this type of relationship with Amazon outside of having a union.”

Amazon alleged workers would have to pay hundreds of dollars in dues. “Why pay almost $500 in dues? We’ve got you covered with high wages, health care, vision, and dental benefits, as well as a safety committee and an appeals process. There’s so much MORE you can do for your career and your family without paying dues,” the site states.

Source: Amazon Trying to Block Voting by Mail in Unionization Election