Howard Lurie: Mail-in ballots lack the security of traditional voting
In the next few weeks we will be going to the polls to elect, among other things, the next president of the United States. At least, some of us will be going to the polls. Others, where permitted, will already have voted early, and a great many others will be voting by mail-in ballot. It is entirely possible that the winner of the presidential vote will be determined by the mail-in ballots.
What do you suppose would happen if, after I cast my personal vote at my precinct, I returned to the front table where the voter sign-in workers were seated, and asked to be given my wife’s ballot? I am willing to bet that you would agree with my assessment that my request would be refused. But what if I assured them that I had her authorization? I have no doubt that that would make no difference. They would, in all likelihood, insist that she would have to cast her vote herself. But, I could truthfully claim, I have a signed letter from her authorizing me to vote for her. I suspect that that would make no difference. As a last resort I produce a notarized affidavit, in language that would otherwise be legally sufficient, from her authorizing me to cast her vote. At this point, I wouldn’t be surprised if the election judge insisted that I leave, and if I persisted further, the police would be called.
Apparently, only the registered voter is allowed to mark their ballot and cast their vote at the election precinct. A spouse, relative, employer, union representative, ward leader, clergyman, attorney, or anyone else is not allowed to cast that vote. The voter gets to vote in secret. No one is allowed to see for whom the voter is voting. Regardless of whether the voter has assured someone that he is going to be voting for a particular candidate, he can, in secret, disregard that assurance and vote some other way. The secret ballot is sacrosanct.
Since our founding as a nation, free and secure elections have depended upon the secret ballot. In many parts of the world the elections are rigged. The will of the voters does not matter. But in a truly free democracy the government is elected by the people with a secret and secure ballot.
Unfortunately, with the advent of mail-in voting, the ballot is no longer secret. Indeed, with mail-in voting, the registered voter may not be the person marking the ballot. With a mail-in ballot, I might actually be able to cast my wife’s ballot with or without her permission. Without a requirement of a personal appearance at the voting precinct, there is really no way that we can be assured that the voter has actually marked that ballot. Of course, that was true with all absentee ballots, but they were always small in number. Today, with millions voting by mail-in ballots, there can be no assurance that the registered voter is really the person casting the vote. That ballot could well be marked by a spouse, relative, employer, union representative, ward leader, clergyman, attorney, or anyone else in a position to do so.
There is simply no way that a ballot sent through the mail to an address, and retained somewhere for a significant period of time before being returned by mail can be assured the secrecy that obtains at a voting precinct where the voter appears in person. No matter what signatures or assurances the return envelope requires, the secrecy of that ballot cannot be guaranteed.
Millions of dollars are spent on political campaigns. Blatant lies are spoken by the candidates themselves in advertisements of which they say they approve. The consequences of winning or losing are of tremendous importance. In other areas of life, fraud, scams, cheating, and corruption go on despite being criminal. Are we to assume that only political elections are free from improper conduct? Bad people, and even good people who are convinced of the righteousness of their position, are not above acting improperly. To a great many, the end justifies the means.
A free and democratic society, if once lost, may never be recovered. Those who have achieved power improperly will not willingly surrender it. A corrupt government will write the rules that allow them to remain in power. The only remedy, short of revolution, is to prevent them from gaining power in the first place.
A free, secret, and secure ballot is the only way. Mail-in ballots are neither secret nor secure.
Howard Lurie is Emeritus Professor of Law, Charles Widger School of Law, Villanova University
Lets remember that the bill in Pennsylvania that allowed mail in ballots was passed by Republicans in the state legislature. Since all of those Republicans thought this was safe and effective. Who are you to question their collective wisdom.