Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Witness warns mail voting increases risks and stresses need for accurate voter lists
Loading...
Summary
Mr. Braden told the House Administration Committee that mail voting depends on accurate voter lists and is "more dangerous" than in-person voting because it lacks polling-place safeguards; he cited delivery-failure estimates ranging from 0.5% to 4% and said he could not identify a definitive number.
A witness testifying before the House Administration Committee said mail voting increases the stakes for accurate voter rolls and poses security and delivery risks compared with in-person voting.
"Mail voting is ... more dangerous for the security of the ballot process than in-person voting," Mr. Braden said. He argued that mail voting lacks the physical secrecy and oversight provided at polling places and that the system depends on the U.S. mail and the accuracy of voter lists.
Braden noted he has seen estimates for first-class mail delivery failures ranging "from half a percent to 4%," and said that makes a material difference when states send millions of ballots. Using California as an example, he said hundreds of thousands of ballots could be delayed or undelivered if even a small percentage of mail fails to arrive on time.
He also said a presidential executive order had attempted to ban mail voting; he questioned whether the president had authority to do so and said that authority ordinarily resides with Congress and the states.
Committee questioning in this segment was limited to witnesses’ testimony; members did not vote or introduce legislation in this exchange. The statements on delivery rates were presented as estimates by the witness, and the committee did not produce an independent verification of the mail-failure figures during the hearing.
