[ MUSIC ] [ MUSIC ] This program is brought to you by the members of WCNY.

Thank you.

With Pomeroy markers, history is based on the facts embedded by professional historians.

Over 3,000 installed nationwide, from Maine to Florida, to California, to Minnesota, to Texas, and Alaska.

Since 2006, our markers have helped people celebrate community history.

Marker grant program information available at WGPFoundation.org.

[ MUSIC ] [ MUSIC ] KATKO: Welcome, America, to "Balancing Act", the show that aims to tame the political circus of two-party politics.

I'm John Katko.

Tonight, voting by mail -- convenient or compromised?

In the center ring, we'll ask Charles Stewart of MIT's Election Data in Science Lab.

On the trapeze, Hans von Spakovsky and Eliza Sweren-Becker take swings at the issue.

Plus, I'll give you my take.

And Did You Know, sometimes voters can be a little spaced out.

But first, let's walk the tightrope.

[ MUSIC ] [ MUSIC ] America has never had one national set of voting rules.

States have traditionally run elections while Congress can set certain rules for federal contests.

And for much of American history, voting meant simply showing up at the polls.

That began to change during the Civil War when states found ways for soldiers away from home to cast absentee ballots.

Civilian absentee voting expanded in the late 1800s initially for people who were sick, or away on Election Day.

Over time, the rules loosened.

Beginning in the late 20th century, more states allowed voters to request an absentee ballot without giving a reason.

Oregon went further, becoming the very first state to conduct its elections primarily by mail.

Today, eight states and Washington, D.C.

allow all elections to be conducted mostly by mail.

Although voters can still return those ballots in person.

And it's no longer a small percentage of the electorate.

According to the U.S.

Census Bureau, 29% of voters voted by mail in the 2024 election.

So how safe is it?

States use different safeguards.

The most common is signature verification.

Election officials may compare this signature on the return envelope with one already on file.

Some states also use identification numbers and ballot tracking.

Other states use a process called curing, but it gives the voter a chance to fix a problem with the ballot before it's ultimately rejected.

But voting by mail does create risks that are different from voting inside polling places.

A ballot is completed outside the view of election officials, and has to travel back to them.

That raises concerns about coercion, ballot collection, interception, and whether someone other than the voter could request or handle a ballot.

Those concerns are not entirely theoretical.

In North Carolina's ninth Congressional District Race in 2018, for example, and an illegal absentee ballot operation, led state officials to order an entirely new election.

My researchers at MIT's Election Data and Science Lab say documented fraud involving voting by mail is rare, and they have found no evidence that fraud is generally more common in states that rely heavily on mail-in voting.

The fight today is often over the rules.

Who should qualify?

How ballots should be verified, who may collect them, and when they have to arrive.

In June, the U.S.

Supreme Court ruled that federal law does not require a mail-in ballot to arrive by Election Day.

allowing states to continue counting ballots that are postmarked by Election Day, but received later, only if state laws permitted.

So, voting by mail is now a regular part of American elections.

The question is whether it's convenience comes with acceptable safeguards, or whether those safeguards need to be stronger.

So, is casting your ballot by mail convenient or compromised?

Let's find out as we cast ourselves into the center ring.

Joining me now is Charles Stewart, founding director of the aforementioned MIT Election Data and Science Lab.

Welcome, Charles, and let's get right to it.

I have my absentee ballot.

I fill it out on my kitchen table and toss it in the mail.

What happens to it?

STEWART: Well, if you toss it in the mail in your mailbox, then it goes into the mail stream where it is canceled and, you know, moved by the Postal Service through its process to the local election office eventually.

where the election office then verifies that that ballot came from you, usually by comparing your signature with what they have on file - so the signature on the outer ballot with what they have on file.

Increasingly, they're also comparing it with other forms of identification, like your Social Security number, driver's license number, something like that.

I mean, once they verified it's you, then they separate the ballot from that identity envelope, and then you're off to the tabulation.

KATKO: Okay, so you talk a little bit about the safeguards.

I want to delve a little bit more into that, because therein lies the rub with people's faith in that process.

What are some of the concerns that have been raised about the safeguard process?

STEWART: Well, I think there's, you know, there's a couple.

I mean, the concerns that are popularly raised are, I would say, first of all, a lot coercion at, you know, around the kitchen table, let's say.

And then other concerns are whether people are impersonating other voters when they vote.

and, I would say, those are the two big safeguards.

And we have little evidence that either is a major problem, but certainly, you know, the government can go into your home and make sure there's, you know, spouses aren't looking over each other's shoulders.

But outside the home that's where the, you know, that's where the great dangers can be mitigated by administrative procedures, laws, and things like that.

And, that's really where we concentrate.

KATKO: So, when you talk about signature matching, for example, is it just one human eyeballing another's signature, and comparing it to what they have, or is there a machine that does that, or how does that work?

STEWART: It really varies around the country.

I would say that in general, in places that have the lower kind of lower volume of signature matching, you typically have teams of a couple of people who are comparing the signature on the envelope that got sent back, but the signature on file.

Increasingly, you have multiple signatures on file, because you might not only have the signature you gave when you registered to vote, but many places now are accumulating, say, all the signatures that you might have used in dealing with a local government.

When you filed your taxes, for instance, or when you got a driver's license renewed.

so that's the typical thing.

In some jurisdictions, there is automated signature verification similar to what banks do with checks.

And in those situations, obviously the concern about, this is an AI system.

So there's signature, and concerns about oversight.

So typically, there's auditing of the machines, regularly doing human matching, as well, to make sure that the machines are functioning properly, as well as also the practice with machine verification, that you can't reject a mail ballot solely because of machine has rejected it.

If the machine rejects it, then it definitely goes to human adjudication.

KATKO: So I want to get into some actual fraud instances that have been uncovered, but before that, one quick thing, and it should be a simple answer.

Machines themselves are the electoral machines that tabulate the ballots?

Are they tied to the internet at all?

STEWART: No, they're not at all.

KATKO: And why is that?

STEWART: I mean, they're definitely not tied to the internet, and actually the way that the totals from the machine get transferred to the computers that's add up all the votes, is good old-fashioned sneaker net.

Will you take, you know, a thumb drive and move it from one machine to the other?

KATKO: Right, and the reason for that is to prevent anybody from actually trying to do a computer hack of the results and change them, right?

STEWART: Absolutely, and before that, there's also auditing and verification that the scanner itself is properly reading ballots.

KATKO: So we have about four minutes left.

I want to spend the rest of the time on some of the allegations that have been out there, some of the things we actually have been fraud, and why you say it's not a huge concern, and it doesn't affect election outcomes.

So could you kind of start with some of the actual problems that have been uncovered?

I think there was something in the Carolinas in 2018, that precipitated a revote.

But let's talk about that and others that have been out there.

STEWART: Yeah, so that, I mean, that's probably the most famous one recently that was, I believe, the ninth district in North Carolina, and, in fact, the violation of state law was so great that the State Board of Elections tossed out the election and had to be run again.

I think that so that case was a matter of illegal ballot harvesting.

where somebody was, paid to, harvest up ballots, and there were allegations made that, this was done in a way to favor, one of the candidates.

Although, as far as I recall, that allegation wasn't proven, but certainly, the harvesting was confirmed.

It should be said that, in some states, harvesting is allowed, but it's not allowed in North Carolina.

It was found because there were very unusual signs in the records kept by the state board of elections about the return of ballots.

They were coming back in very, very odd and unusual patterns.

in batches from particular places all at once.

KATKO: So I'm going to interrupt you real quick, and just explain briefly what ballot harvesting is.

>> Ballot harvesting is when, I go door to door, and, I go door to door, and I say, gee, you know, it's kind of a pain for you to get a stamp for your ballot.

Why don't you give it to me?

And I'll make sure it gets in.

And you go down through the neighborhood doing that.

>> Oh, for the record, when I was in Congress, I never did that.

So, all right, so that's one case.

What are some other just quick examples?

STEWART: Well, my favorite one was for a county judge, several decades ago, where, the two candidates for county judge set up in the county courthouse, and they had voters coming in, bidding for votes for one of the candidates or the other.

and, so, you had the absentee ballot and whoever got the higher, bid, you know, cast the ballot and, you know, it went to that judge.

That was discovered.

Another case, several decades ago, involving the Miami mayoral election, where also there was a large-scale effort to illegally request mail ballots and to mail them.

That fraud was so extensive that it was easily caught because of the volume, and that election also was tossed out.

KATKO: So Charles, we have about a minute and a half left, and it's not enough time, but that's all we have.

You did a study, and MIT did a study about the overall election integrity nationwide, and you came to conclusions, there's spot examples which you've laid out.

How can you convince people or tell people that there's not widespread fraud?

How did you insure that in your conclusion?

STEWART: Well, one of the ways you insure it is by looking at the record of prosecutions for fraud, which are rare.

And then one also looks at the various safeguards.

You know, we don't have the time to go into all of them.

But there are many eyes watching all the process.

In the case of mail ballots, from sending out to returning the ballots, and the many opportunities to verify that the proper actions have been made, not only by the election officials, but by observers from political parties and campaigns who are also observing the process.

They raised alarm bells, and there are periodically alarm bells raised, and in those cases, investigations, and sometimes prosecutions ensue.

KATKO: All right, well, Charles Stewart of MIT.

Thanks for joining us.

I could talk to you forever about this subject, but, I think he laid it perfectly for the next segment.

Thanks so much.

Joining us now, our Eliza Sweren-Becker.

Deputy director of voting rights and elections at the Brennan Center for Justice.

And Hans von Spakovsky, senior legal fellow, and advancing American freedom, and a former federal election commissioner, welcome to you both, and Eliza, let's start with you real quick.

Should every single American have the right or the ability to vote by mail?

And if so, why?

SWEREN-BECKER: Thanks so much for having me.

And yes, absolutely.

I think every eligible American citizen should have the right to vote by mail.

It's an exceedingly convenient voting option that tens of millions of Americans already use, that has been proven effective, and has been used all the way back since the Civil War.

American democracy should meet Americans where they are so that the most possible American citizens can participate in our elections.

KATKO: Hans, your take?

VON SPAKOVSKY: look, I think people should be able to vote with the absentee ballot, but only if they are unable for various reasons to make it into a polling place.

That has really been minimized because we don't just have one Election Day anymore.

We have early voting in most states.

The biggest issue, John, is timing.

Let me just quickly give, like, two reports.

The EAC, US Election Assistance Commission, did a report on the 2024 election.

And out of the 6 out of 600,000 absentee ballots that were returned by voters, mail-in ballots that were rejected, almost 18% were rejected because they weren't returned on time.

That's a lot of votes that otherwise would have counted if those individuals had voted a polling place similarly.

The Inspector General, the USPS, US Postal Service, they released a report last year and said that when it came to returning, completed ballots, to election officials, they did it on time, 96% of the time.

Well, that sounds good until you realize, that means that 4% of ballots completed by eligible voters did not make it back in time.

And that is one of the biggest problems with voting by mail.

KATKO: So, Eliza, that is, seems like an interesting point, because I listen to my races, they weren't that close generally, but there's a lot of races in this country where they were decided by less than 1%.

So what about the timing issue?

What about people having their votes rejected?

Isn't that a concern?

SWEREN-BECKER: Certainly, if ballots are arriving after the deadline and are not counted, that is a concern for the eligible voters whose ballots weren't cast.

But what that means is we need to do a better job of educating American voters to make sure that they get their ballots in as early as possible, and that they know there are lots of methods for ballot return, like ballot drop boxes in many states, returning ballots at election official offices, or at polling places.

So depending on the state rules, there are lots of options that could avoid postal service delays that could contribute to those ballots being rejected for being late.

But we should make sure that every eligible American citizen can cast the ballot that counts, and for many, many, 1000000s of American voters, that means voting by mail.

And our system needs to do better to make sure that their ballots can get in on time.

KATKO: So Hans, can they do better?

VON SPAKOVSKY: No, because the IG of USPS issues, has issued reports for years, and they simply cannot achieve, Look, they do a pretty good job.

They simply can achieve 100% on-time delivery of these ballots.

And keep in mind, that's an average.

If you look at some of the other reports they've issued, some of 13 their mail facilities, they're on time delivery, wasn't in the 90s.

It was in the 80s percentile.

These are all issues that would not occur when you're voting at a polling place.

Also, keep in mind, the EAC report, for example, said that 40% of the ballots are returned by voters were rejected.

Why?

Because they didn't have a signature on them or the signature didn't match.

Again, that's an issue that would not occur in a polling place where there's an election official present to answer any questions a voter may have and to take care of any issues that arise, that doesn't happen when a voter is on their own trying to figure out how to return an absentee ballot.

KATKO: Okay, I want to switch gears a little bit, because obviously, you know, there are issues, and the question is whether you can fix them, and Eliza's saying, We got to get better at fixing them.

And I understand it.

I want to talk about vulnerabilities for a moment.

It seems like there isn't an election in the last, since 2000, at least, with the Florida hanging chad issue, that people haven't called into question the overall integrity of the process.

A lot of people point to mail-in ballots.

So, Hans, what are some of the concerns, if any, that you have with respect to the integrity, the vulnerabilities with mail and processes, other than what you've mentioned?

VON SPAKOVSKY: Well, look, everybody talked about mass fraud.

Well, I don't contend that there's mass fraud, but there's enough absentee ballot fraud that we should be concerned about it.

And if you want an example of that, look at the 2018 congressional race in the ninth district of North Carolina, the state board of elections overturned that race because of a concerted effort to basically steal absentee ballots from voters, to submit fraudulent ballots.

And what's interesting about that case, in other cases that have occurred like this, similar case in Indiana, in East Chicago, that was overturned by the State Supreme Court, was that who is it that's targeted in these, absentee ballot fraud games?

It's often poor neighborhoods, the infirm, the elderly.

In fact, the State Supreme Court in Indiana talked about that, a predatory pattern.

That's who they targeted.

Similar in Troy, New York, I think it was 2003, four local political operatives pleaded guilty.

They targeted a low-income neighborhood and why?

Well, one of them told the police because those are the folks, least likely to notice we've stolen their ballots, at least likely to complain about it and that is a problem.

KATKO: Eliza, your take?

SWEREN-BECKER: I think the cases my colleague has pointed out are actually great examples of this system working.

On the rare occasions where someone tries to take advantage of voters, they have been criminally prosecuted, and elections have been redone to ensure that voters can cast a ballot that counts and their choice for the election is counted.

And that is because there are layers of processes and safeguards in place to make sure that our election systems and mail voting in particular are safe and secure.

And if any of those systems are breached, as the example in North Carolina shows a campaign, a candidates, employees were interfering with the ability of voters to cast mail ballots for their candidates of choice.

Then the system will catch that, identify that problem, and allow those voters to really make their voices heard in the election and not be interfered with.

So the processes are working.

Election officials, state officials work very hard to make sure voters can cast their ballots account, and on the rare occasion where something goes wrong, they fix it.

KATKO: So, Hans, a quick, quick response, when I got about a minute left on each side.

Should ballots arrive by Election Day?

VON SPAKOVSKY: Yes, they should.

One of the reasons, Florida, Florida really cleaned up its elections after the 2000 debacle, allowing ballots to come in after Election Day is very problematic for a lot of reasons, including security reasons.

And by the way, you know, states that allow that say, well, we make sure that, the stamp on the outside envelope is by Election Day.

If you look at that IG report, that I mentioned, one of the issues they raised there is a lot of postal facilities don't date stamp envelopes anymore.

So when ballots come in after Election Day, we don't really know if the voter waited until after Election Day and saw early results before mailing it.

KATKO: Eliza?

KATKO: Eliza?

You got about 45 seconds.

Your response?

SWEREN-BECKER: In our country, states run elections.

The Constitution gives authority to make rules for elections to states and to Congress.

States have set their mail-in ballot receipt deadlines in order to meet the needs of their voters and their constituents.

And they have set the mail ballot receipt deadlines that work best in their states, and those are the laws the Supreme Court has affirmed that that is appropriate, and that is what Congress has allowed.

And so the mail ballot receipt deadlines of states are the laws of the land, and that's what voters need to satisfy.

KATKO:Liza, really quick, if you could change one thing about the way America handles voting by mail, what would it be?

SWEREN-BECKER: I would want to give more resources to the Postal Service to be able to handle that those mail ballots as efficiently as possible, and that would make it even easier for state and local election officials to then handle those ballots.

KATKO: Hans?

VON SPAKOVSKY: every state should require anyone voting through the mail, to present an ID or an ID serial number the way states like Georgia and Texas have implemented that.

KATKO: All right, great.

Thanks so much for a spirited conversation and an interesting issue with that has a lot of sides to it.

Hans von Spakovsky and Eliza Sweren-Becker, thank you both very much.

[ MUSIC ] [ MUSIC ] The bedrock of any democracy is the individual's right to vote.

As we have learned from the discussion today, though, that fundamental right is being increasingly exercised through voting by mail.

With that comes concerns about security, integrity, and the timing of those votes.

And those concerns are legitimate to some degree, even though there is no credible evidence of pervasive voter fraud.

Tweaking the rules so that as many Americans as possible can participate in this great experiment called democracy, is indeed a worthy goal.

But X should not come at the expense of confidence in the process.

It seems unlikely that the federal government will create a single national standard for voting by mail.

So, much of the responsibility will continue to fall in the states to craft rules that ballots access with security.

It will take a sober, nonpolitical effort to accomplish this, and I hope they get it right.

Because having faith in election results should not be an aspiration, it should be a fact.

And that's my take.

And that's my take.

Did you know that in 1997, Texas changed its laws, so astronauts could vote while in orbit?

NASA astronaut David Wolf became the very first American to vote from space.

Casting his ballot while aboard the Russian Mir Space Station of all places.

That was one small click for an astronaut and one giant leap for absentee voting.

And now, you do know.

And now, you do know.

That's all for this week, folks.

To send your comments for the show, or to see "Balancing Act" extras and exclusives, folluw us on social media, or go to BalancingActwithJohnKatko.com.

Thank you for joining us, and remember, in this circus that is politics, there's always a "Balancing Act".

I'm John Katko.

We'll see you next week, America.

[ MUSIC ] [ MUSIC ] With Pomeroy markers, history is based on the facts embedded by professional historians.

Over 3,000 installed nationwide, from Maine to Florida, California, to Minnesota, to Texas and Alaska.

Since 2006, our markers have helped people celebrate community history.

Marker grant program information available at WGPFoundation.org.

available at WGPFoundation.org.

[ MUSIC ] [ MUSIC ] [ MUSIC ] [ MUSIC ] [ MUSIC ] [ MUSIC ]