Committee hears hours of testimony on bill to require mailed ballots be received by close of polls

A House Elections Committee hearing on Senate Bill 4 drew several hours of testimony on whether Kansas should eliminate the three-day grace period that currently allows mail ballots postmarked by election day to be counted if received within three days.

The bill, introduced to require that “all advance voting ballots have to be received in the office of the county election officer or the polling place … by 7 p.m. on election day,” was described to the committee by a member of the Revisor’s office as a measure that would remove the postmark-based grace period and align Kansas with other states that require receipt by the close of polls.

Why it matters: proponents and opponents agreed the proposal would change how many late mail ballots are handled and could affect voters who rely on mail delivery or who live far from processing centers. Supporters said the change would speed vote tabulation and reduce post-election litigation; opponents warned it would disenfranchise rural voters and people with disabilities who depend on mail or face logistical challenges.

Jason Snead, executive director of Honest Elections Project ACTION, testified in support of SB 4. “SB 4 is a straightforward and necessary update,” Snead said, arguing the receipt deadline is an “unambiguous and clear rule” that would promote election integrity, speed tabulation and avoid post-election lawsuits that challenge postmarks or legibility. He told the committee that, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, a majority of states require ballots to be received by the close of polls and said polling his organization cited shows strong public support for receipt deadlines.

Clay Barker, general counsel for the Kansas secretary of state, testified as neutral. Barker outlined the origin of the three-day grace period — put in place after postal delays were documented — and said the secretary’s office sees plausible arguments on both sides. Barker told the committee that about 2,100 ballots arrived after election day and were counted in the most recent general election, and that 104 arrived without a postmark; he also urged that if SB 4 becomes law, remote drop boxes remain available so voters with mail ballots can deliver them in person.

Opponents including Roshanae Hamby, director of policy and research at the ACLU of Kansas, said eliminating the grace period risks discarding ballots that were properly mailed but delayed in transit. “Removing or replacing the three-day voting window would penalize mail-in voters because it will put something that is entirely out of their control on them,” Hamby said, adding that rural voters are especially likely to rely on mail and longer processing times.

Mike Burgess of the Disability Rights Center of Kansas explained how the change could disproportionately affect voters with disabilities, noting that transportation and assistance schedules for some voters can be variable and not fully under the voter’s control. “Any changes like this are going to impact those people the most,” Burgess said.

Other opponents highlighted postal processing problems in particular facilities and said the three-day period was created after the Postal Service notified state officials of slower processing. League of Women Voters of Kansas representative Ciel (Seal) King said the grace period was a logistical fix and argued the current practice protects otherwise properly cast ballots.

Committee members asked about remedies such as public education campaigns and whether adding a postmark-based fallback would help. Proponents cautioned that postmark standards invite litigation and can leave perfectly lawful ballots excluded because a postmark is missing or illegible. Opponents said postal operation differences across regions and temporary disruptions can create delays independent of voter intent.

The hearing closed after extensive testimony and questioning; no committee vote on SB 4 was taken during this session. The committee continued with other agenda business after the hearing was closed.

Ending: The committee did not vote on SB 4 at the hearing. Members and staff discussed data needs and potential administrative steps such as voter education and maintaining drop-box options if the statutory grace period were to be removed. Further action on SB 4 would depend on the committee’s future agenda.