Senate Bill 293, which would require absentee and mail ballots to be received by the close of polls on Election Day, received a second hearing before the Ohio Senate General Government Committee and an amendment carving out UOCAVA voters was adopted without objection.

The bill drew proponent testimony from Chad Ennis of Honest Elections Project ACTION, who told the committee the bill “gives a bright line rule” that will reduce litigation and make administration easier. Ennis said the change would align Ohio with 34 other states and argued voters would adjust behavior if the deadline were moved earlier: “They'll know they need to get their ballot in earlier.”

The committee adopted amendment 1148-2, offered by Vice Chair Gavarone, which exempts UOCAVA (Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act) voters from the in-by-Election-Day requirement. The chair announced the amendment was adopted “without objection.” With that action completed, the committee concluded the second hearing on SB 293.

Why it matters: Proponents framed the change as a way to reduce postmark disputes and federal litigation; opponents and some senators questioned whether voters who rely on the mail could be disenfranchised if postal delivery is delayed. The amendment retained an exception for military and overseas voters while preserving the bill's principal deadline change.

Details and context: Chad Ennis said the current system requires officials and courts to evaluate postmarks and can lead to litigation; he called a clear receipt deadline “easy for our election officials to administer.” Senator Mora raised concerns about the U.S. Postal Service’s reliability and asked what would happen if a voter mailed a ballot well before Election Day but the ballot arrived late. Ennis and other proponents pointed to alternatives such as in-person return, early voting and staffed drop-off locations as mitigations.

The committee did not take a final vote on SB 293 during this meeting; the hearing concluded after proponent testimony and the amendment adoption. Further committee action or scheduling for a floor vote was not announced.

Proponents and officials emphasized administrative clarity and litigation avoidance; critics warned of potential mail-related disenfranchisement and urged care in changing long-standing deadlines.