On May 13, the Pennsylvania House passed HB 1396 by 102-101. Among other things, it removes the requirement that voters who vote by mail must add the date of mailing to the outer envelope. It also makes it easier to vote early. However, the bill is not likely to pass the State Senate.
This increases fraud. Hoping it fails the Senate.
What is the connection between fraud and whether the outer envelope has a date on it? No other state has such a requirement. Postal ballots are date-stamped in the elections office when they arrive, so what is the usefulness of the voter putting a date on the outer envelope?
Making mail-in easier creates more opportunity for fraud. If you are too stupid to not follow simple instructions such as putting a date on an envelope, you shouldn’t be allowed to vote.
To ensure it was mailed before the election?
The postmark is much better for that purpose. Writing a date on an envelope doesn’t necessarily mean the envelope was mailed that day.
Postal ballots are more protected against fraud than normal ballots are. Every postal ballot that arrives in an election administration office has the signature on the envelope compared to the signature in the voter registration records.
They’re not protected from fraud, either by postal workers or ballot harvesters.
@RW,
How do you know that the voter was not being bribed?
I have to show a photo ID when I vote. I suppose I could steal someone’s wallet and make a disguise and vote a second time, but that would be hard to do on a mass basis.
@JR
If voting wasn’t secret – if others could see how you voted – would you be concerned about voters being paid to vote for someone? Is that considered a bribe, even?
How many candidates with nonstop threats / bribes — to get elected and re-elected ???
——–
PR
APPV
TOTSOP
Comparing signatures is far from an exact science.