Why Pennsylvania should audit the 2020 election
On Nov. 19 the Pennsylvania House passed House Resolution 1100, a measure directing the nonpartisan Legislative Budget and Finance Committee to conduct a “risk-limiting” audit of ballots canvassed in the 2020 election. The vote was mostly along party lines, with all Republican legislators voting yes and all but three Democrats voting no.
Despite claims that the purpose of the audit wasn’t to boost President Trump’s unfounded allegations of voter fraud, it’s not hard to read between the lines.
In a not-too-subtle repudiation of the political skullduggery at play, the nonpartisan Legislative Budget, and Finance Committee on Nov. 23 rejected the audit request. With Pennsylvania’s election results officially certified for President-Elect Biden, the audit will likely die a quiet death.
But maybe we shouldn’t bury the idea of an audit just yet.
As a Democrat, I support the idea of an audit if the intentions are genuine and the intended goals are well-defined. HR1100 focused on auditing mail-in ballots and the impact of COVID-19 on the election process, totally ignoring the election’s safety, security, accessibility or equity.
There were glaring flaws in Act 77 — the updated voting law passed last year that made vote-by-mail possible — that were identified by election experts before this past election. One such flaw was the legality of ballot drop boxes.
However, the Legislature failed to enact any reforms in time, mainly because neither party wanted to concede any ground that may have benefited their side, regardless of the impact on the election process.
With the 2020 election in the rearview mirror, we have an opportunity to learn how to do better, and we cannot let that opportunity slip away. I urge the Legislature — both Democrats and
Republicans — to request a legitimate, nonpartisan performance audit or investigation of the 2020 election, with emphasis on determining the following:
We have 67 counties, each with its own specific processes and procedures for voting. What practices work better than others, especially for non-English speaking voters, people with disabilities or those who may have trouble understanding their ballot?
Were there instances of misinformation or voter intimidation at any polling sites? Were polling places free from religious or other materials intended to sway voters or impact their beliefs?
We should evaluate all the ways to return ballots, including but not limited to: mail, dropbox, dropoff at the county elections office, and any voting location. Why should a person be stuck to a particular location?
Is there a better way to support county election offices? Was there sufficient technology and systems in place? Were there sufficient resources to properly train temporary workers?
How many ballots arrived after Election Day despite being postmarked on time?
Did the security envelope process work as intended and was it too complicated for voters to understand? From what I have read, using the extra envelope is a transition from how voteby-mail used to work.
Let’s look to the experience of other states and get rid of the extra envelope and all the costs associated with it — and for heaven’s sake, no more penalizing voters for naked ballots.
Were there enough poll workers and judges of elections to staff polling locations? Do they receive the training and resources they need?
Was every in-person voter actively offered the option to vote using the “ballot marking system?” Were voters aware that this was an option?
The ballot marking system helps assure ballots are properly marked so they can be easily read by a machine. The ballot marker also has a positive effect on accessibility. A few places, including Cook County, Illinois, use the ballot markers as a way to offer more languages than they are legally required to because they save the cost of printing.
There was confusion about the postmarking of ballots and when they are counted. We should not limit the postmark to the round cancellation mark, but we should accept other United State Postal Service marks. There is good model legislation in Ohio.
Are we using best practices to comply with the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting
Act for our military voters and their families?
If the Legislature is genuinely interested in ensuring our elections are safe, secure, accessible and equal, then I support the idea of an audit or investigation wholeheartedly. But instead of serving partisan political interests, let’s use the 2020 Election as a teachable moment to help us make commonsense improvements to our election process.
The goal should be simple: To make it safer and more straightforward for all Pennsylvanians to exercise their sacred right to vote.