Ensure safeguards for voting

In the rush to provide mail-in ballots to registered voters in the November presidential election, it appears that certain safeguards are not in place. A recent federal lawsuit points out a glaring problem with the process (Aug. 7 online, “Lawsuit Challenges Signature Verification of Mail-In Ballots”).

When the county elections department receives the ballots, a county employee will make the decision to accept or reject a ballot. In some cases, a county layperson will make the final decision that ballot does not include a signature or has a forged signature. In some cases a voter may not know about the rejection until after the election. This is unacceptable, and the county must ensure that each vote is counted correctly with notice to the voters. The voter will then be given the opportunity to contest the elections department decision and have the vote counted.

When a taxpayer files for the Act 50/Homestead exclusion and the application is rejected it is common practice to notify the applicant in writing. The applicant has the right to appeal that decision. Some applications are rejected because of no signature or a bad signature. A county employee makes that call. This same standard should apply to the ballots. Receive, verify, notify.

The question is: Will counties have the needed funds and employees to make sure that voters are not disenfranchised? Counties must have the necessary safeguards in place with proper disclosure from all voters in Pennsylvania.

MIKE SULEY

Scott