Vote-By-Mail: Expensive & Easier to Manipulate

opinion by Richard Borkowski

Editor's note--Progressives have in the past couple decades typically been supportive of mail-in voting because various reports have pointed toward higher voter participation when people can vote at their leisure at home. However, as Richard Borkowski here points out, there are also well-argued concerns regarding the practice, especially if it is the only voting option. There have lately been plans floated in Washington for moving toward all-mail voting, but there has been relatively little discussion in the mainstream press of the ethics and possible dangers of doing so. I hope this article will prompt further discussion.

What is the penalty for elected officials that violate the State Constitution, or allow ballots to be lost or destroyed during an election, or remove the public's ability to observe the counting of ballots, or institute a voting system that is even more capable of manipulation by insiders? The answer to all four: none. Instead of penalties, they routinely get another term in office.

All over America, election officials are rushing to reduce accountability and transparency in elections, even trying to introduce paperless computerized voting machines and mail-only voting systems over the howling protests of activists, computer experts and lawyers who are waging a battle to save the heart and soul of our democracy--our elections. Elections in the United States are being turned into one big glitch. In many cases, nobody can verify if the elections are real or a charade because public observation of vote counting is partially or totally eliminated.

Many ordinary citizens are becoming very familiar with our state's constitution and realizing that mail-only voting violates it. Article VI, Section 6 of the Washington State Constitution says, "All elections shall be by ballot. The legislature shall provide for such method of voting as will secure to every elector absolute secrecy in preparing and depositing his ballot."

Mail-only voting violates this constitutional provision by eliminating the secrecy that is provided by the voting booth. The voting booth allows you to cast your vote freely, and to, if necessary, even lie to the boss or political hack that is pressuring you to cast your vote a certain way.

The history of voting intimidation is precisely why our constitution doesn't say 'pretty good secrecy.' It says 'absolute secrecy.' Ballots that travel back and forth via the Postal Service after being subjected to untold intimidation all over the county do not meet the intent of that "absolute secrecy" provision.

The case for getting rid of polling places is based on myths. One myth of mail-only voting is that it increases participation. This is true for the first election or two until the novelty wears off. Over the long term, however, people might be less likely to vote if they view filling out their ballot as they would paying a bill, because bills not immediately due get misplaced. This benefits the party in office.

Another myth is that mail-only voting is secure. We are now in an age where our signatures are digitized and stored by the government and big corporations, and signing machines have been around for decades. The signature match is the main security check for mail-only voting, yet real signatures tend to change over time, while computerized machines can produce a pretty good signature duplicate.

The biggest myth of mail-only voting is that it will save taxpayer dollars. In any given election, there will be many registered voters who do not vote. Taxpayer dollars pay for ballots to be assembled and sent to every absentee voter in every election, many of whom don't vote in every election.

Furthermore, thousands of these unwanted ballots will be floating around in the mail system unprotected, targets for mail theft, substitution and vote-selling.

As America found out with the Iraq war, our intelligence agencies have been used as instruments of political propaganda. Mail theft is rampant as evidenced by Social Security checks and credit card statements being stolen regularly. Mail-in ballots are clearly labeled, so they are easy targets as well.

A recent federal case in the 6th Circuit found among other things that Ohio's central optical scanning system for vote counting (the type of system used for mail-in voting in Washington state) violated the U.S. Constitution's Equal Protection clause for their inaccuracy relative to other voting systems.

This Stewart v. Blackwell case, however, upheld precinct-based optical scanners, and touch screen DRE (Direct Recording Electronic) voting machines, but for all the wrong reasons. Because the findings of this case conflict with those of a 9th Circuit case, it may be headed to the US Supreme Court.

However, the fact that such racial differences are seen between races even within the same county proves that this is one area where technology is not to blame. Instead, decisions on how vote counting machines are managed, maintained, allocated, set and operated are the factors that result in different rates of lost votes for different races of voters, even within the same county. The machines can't possibly know the race of the voter and adjust themselves for that reason!

Central counting systems, including those used for mail-only voting, give elected officials power to fiddle with the machines in order to shave down the votes of disfavored precincts or groups.

The situation is even worse with secret vote-counting systems like touch screens, where it is no longer even necessary to steal votes from African Americans individually or by precinct. The entire election can be changed by simply moving a few electrons around. You can see a demonstration of how easy electronic vote fraud can be by viewing a recent panel discussion that occurred at the University of Washington. It's available for webstreaming and broadcast on Seattle Channel (http://seattlechannel.org/media/programDetails.asp?title=5010630).

Most of the litigated problems in Washington's 2004 gubernatorial race were from absentee mail-in voting. Ballots were misplaced, set aside and not counted due to a variety of claimed reasons. After the 2004 election contest, proposing a mail-only voting system seems counter-intuitive. Existing non-electronic polling places with paper ballots and public observation are the best answer presently available. However, this is precisely what mail-only voting advocates want to abandon.

By eliminating public observation, mail-only voting demands we trust without the ability to verify. Democracy works because it was built on checks and balances and not built on "trust." The phrase "trust us" misunderstands democracy and this mantra is having the opposite effect. 51% of Americans doubt that votes are counted accurately according to a November 2004 Pew Research Center Poll.

Article 1, Section 1 of the Washington State Constitution states that "All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights." This should be a constant reminder that the government is to serve the people and not the other way around.

The stakes are high in elections. No one has more to lose when elections are not perceived as fair, accurate and reproducible as the elected officials themselves. Their jobs, their power and their legitimacy ride on election results. Getting rid of the checks and balances of polling places by going to mail-only voting is a very bad idea.