Cedars, October 2020

Fall 2020 22 said. “If people don’t turn out, it will more likely hurt Biden than it will hurt him.” During a pandemic, mail-in voting may be the key to voter turnout. And in the eyes of some, it seems, voter turnout may be one key to influencing the election. Why all the hype? In the end, however, mail-in voting’s impacts on the election itself are likely to be relatively minor. Mail-in voting’s true value to the parties and pundits alike is not as an electoral influence, but as a rhetorical weapon. Democrats claim concerns of disenfranchisement — lack of mail-in voting is equivalent to voter suppression. Meanwhile, Republicans cite largely unfounded fears of fraud, as well as the somewhat more substantiated concerns about chaos during counting. On both sides, however, mail-in voting is being considered only secondarily for those issues themselves. The rhetoric serves primarily as a loss mitigation tactic. It’s a scapegoat to save face for whoever ends up losing. The fact that some states have implemented mail-in voting and some states haven’t means that all parties get to make all of these seemingly contradictory claims, whichever way the election goes. Mail-in voting increased fraud; lack of mail-in voting suppressed turnout. Mail- in voting gave it to the Democrats; lack of mail-in voting gave it to the Republicans. It’s a convenient excuse for whoever happens to need it. Breanna Beers is a senior Molecular Bi- ology major and the Editor-in-Chief of Cedars. She loves exercising curiosity, hiking new trails, and citrus tea. ? AGAINST IN FAVOR COVID-19 makes mail-in voting a national necessity. If half the country can barely open schools, how can we ask people to vote in person? Requiring individuals to physically come to a polling facility could be considered disenfranchising elderly and immunocompromised citizens. Five states already run their elections entirely by mail. Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Utah and Washington mail ballots to every vot- er before every election, demonstrat- ing that mail-in voting can work on a state-wide scale, as would be needed for the November election. Nearly a quarter of all votes in the 2016 elec- tion were received by mail. Contrary to some claims, mail- in voting has not been shown to favor one party over another. How COVID-19 may affect this is up for debate. While Democrats are more likely to consider COVID-19 a major threat to public health, Repub- licans trend older, which may put them at higher risk. Mail-in voting gives voters more time to research and contemplate their decisions. While voters do have access to what will be on the ballot ahead of voting day, having a physical ballot may encourage them to seek informa- tion on candidates, especially those running for less prominent positions that voters might not have heard about otherwise. Mail-in voting is cheaper in the long run than voting in person. Despite some initial expense, mail-in voting eliminates the cost of poll workers and voting machines, which can save the government (and by extension, taxpayers) money over the long term. Mail-in voting can be a bureaucratic nightmare. Past elections have shown how delayed results and counting com- plications can cause chaos, and the U.S. Postal Service is already under pressure from funding cuts. Mail-in primaries were a fiasco in several states. In New York, for example, some elec- tion results were delayed by over a month, and tens of thousands of vot- ers didn’t even receive their absentee ballots in time for the election. On the national level, this kind of delay could result in a contested election. Theoretically, mail-in voting could mean increased opportunities for coercion. Studies have shown that voter fraud in the U.S. is extremely rare. Even so, mail-in voting makes ballots accessi- ble to people other than the intended recipient, which could create the potential for pressure and extortion. Votes can be lost or discarded due to clerical errors. The verification procedures for mail- in ballots are more arduous than they are for in-person polling, and mistakes are far more common. In the 2020 California primary, over 100,000 ballots were rejected due to late postage or signature errors. Mail-in voting comes with up- front expenses. While cheaper in the long-term, implementing mail-in voting as a one- time emergency intervention would require states to rapidly update voter files, verification procedures and tracking methods, all in time for the November election.