Is Colorado’s Election System Worthy of Tout? -YES! Here’s Why.
The election systems of Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Utah, and Hawaii have the distinction where ballots are automatically mailed to registered voters. As the coronavirus pandemic unfolded in 2020, the mail ballot voting systems of the five states were placed in the spotlight as other states and local jurisdictions throughout the country urgently considered and implemented changes or safer options to traditional in-person precinct voting. Since 2013, Colorado has gained prominence in conducting successful mail ballot voting along with having processes that enable efficiency, voter accessibility, increased turnout, and election security. The following is an overview of Colorado’s election model along with issues and commentary about its various features. Numerous sources of online information and articles were reviewed and encapsulated below in an effort to better inform the reader and the public about Colorado’s election process and its history. With or without pandemic urgency, it is hoped that many of the features of Colorado’s election model will seriously be considered, promoted, and implemented nationwide.
HISTORY & BACKGROUND
Colorado adopted statewide mail ballot voting in 2013 under legislation called the Voters Access and Modernized Elections Act which requires county clerks to automatically mail ballots to all registered voters regardless of whether voters ask for one or not.[1] Under the 2013 law, voters can return their completed ballots by mail or return them to a physical location such as a 24/7 secure drop-box location or to a Voter Service and Polling Center.[2] Regardless of whatever return option voters choose, completed ballots must be turned in by 7 pm on election day.[3] If voters do not want to return or cast the ballot that they have received by mail, they can perform in-person early voting or vote on election day at a voter service center (also known as Voter Service and Polling Center) within the county they reside. The 2013 law did away with the traditional precinct polling places in favor of countywide voter service centers. The number of voter service centers are dependent on a county’s population with each county having at least one voter service center. Along with being a location for casting a ballot in-person, the voter service center is a venue where eligible voters from anywhere within a county can drop off a completed mail ballot, perform same-day voter registration, update their voter registration, obtain a replacement ballot, or cast a provisional ballot if necessary.[4] In-person voting at a voter service center location is also an option for voters who have not received a mail ballot or need to vote using machines with assistive and adaptive technologies.[5] If a voter casts a ballot in-person, county clerks will not accept for counting any ballot that has been previously mailed to the voter.[6] The 2013 legislation also extended the deadlines to register to vote by the methods of mail, online, or in-person (at a voter registration agency or at a driver’s license examination center). The 2013 law also shortened Colorado voter registration residency requirements from 30 days to 22 days and eliminated the minimum amount of time a voter must reside within a precinct.[7]
Successful passage of the legislation was a result of Democrats controlling both chambers of the statehouse and the governorship being held by Democrat John Hickenlooper.[8] Although the legislation did not have bi-partisan support within the legislature, it had considerable input and support by the Colorado County Clerks Association whose membership includes both Republican and Democrats.[9] [10] In its letter to lawmakers for the 2013 legislation, the Colorado County Clerks Association stated that in the 2012 November election, 74 percent of voters in Colorado had cast a mail ballot and the figure was asserted by the county clerks as a clear mandate for mail ballot voting.[11] The Boulder County Clerk at the time, Hillary Hall, voiced that the clerks were motivated to update the system and eliminate voter confusion and inefficiencies.[12]
Prior to the 2013 legislation, Colorado counties had a mixed history of success and failure with voting processes. The 2002 Help America Vote Act (“HAVA”), federal legislation created in response to the controversial 2000 presidential election, mandated states update their election procedures with requirements such as buying new voting machines and creating computerized statewide voter registration databases.[13] To meet the requirements of HAVA and to limit costs, the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder in Colorado brainstormed a model with voting being conducted at countywide vote centers or voting locations that were fewer and larger in capacity rather than voters going to their traditional precinct or neighborhood polling places. To ensure that voters could not vote more than once or vote again at another vote center, election officials at each voter center had access to the countywide voter registration roll.[14] This process was first implemented in 2003. In 2004, the Colorado General Assembly passed legislation allowing vote centers to be used in general elections. The legislation was sponsored by a Republican State Senator and a Republican State Representative from Larimer County and was signed into law by Colorado’s Republican Governor. The Larimer County Clerk and Recorder website covers its history and development of vote centers and indicates by early 2005, Larimer County had gained a positive reputation nationwide and as a result, several counties in Colorado and nationwide began implementing the vote center model.[15]
According to Bill Theobald of The Fulcrum, news headlines from the 2004 post-election season focused on hundreds of Colorado voters being investigated for fraud as a result of the highly contested races for president and a U.S. senate seat. Fraud allegations ranged from casting multiple ballots, forging signatures, and voting when ineligible. Per Theobald, “Prosecutors in three-fourths of the state’s counties conducted voter fraud probes and a dozen reported problems.”[16] A March 2005 Associated Press article reported that some of the reported cases may have involved unintentional voter mistakes. The article cited a district attorney official from the 18th Judicial Court who said several voters mistakenly filled out and signed their spouses’ ballots, others submitted ballots sent to voters who previously lived at the same address, and in one case a Douglas County husband and wife each cast absentee ballots and then cast provisional ballots for fear their mail-in votes would not be counted. The official cited said the cases would not be likely prosecuted.[17]
During the 2006 general election, many counties including Denver were plagued with long lines to voting centers, technical problems with centralized computer registration systems, malfunctions with voter machines, and a broken ballot scanner.[18]
In 2008, Colorado county clerks dealt with a surge of mail-in balloting as a result of the state allowing voters to sign up to receive ballots by mail.[19] Officials explained that the reasoning for the spike was voter anxiety concerning the lack of technical reliability of the states’ voting machines, avoidance of long lines, and voter preference to have time to digest the numerous issues and referenda on the ballot.[20]
By the time Colorado did the election system overhaul in 2013, about 70 percent of the voters had already opted to receive ballots by mail on a permanent basis.[21] The 2013 legislation ultimately expanded the state’s current use of mail balloting and enacted procedures and technologies that were already in use in Colorado counties. Under the current system, each of Colorado’s 64 county clerks run elections according to state law and rules established by the secretary of state. Processes and protocols are by and large consistent statewide with minor differences amongst the counties.[22]
VOTER REGISTRATION
Colorado voters enacted a Motor Voter Act in 1984 allowing voter registration while an individual applies for a driver’s license.[23] Almost a decade later on the federal level, Congress passed the 1993 National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) which required a majority of the states to allow voter registration while applying for or renewing a driver’s license. The NVRA also included the requirement that voter registration opportunities occur at any state office that provides public assistance or operates state-funded programs serving the disabled.[24]
In 2017, former Republican Secretary of State Wayne Williams enacted by rule change a program making voter registration automatic for eligible voters while visiting the driver’s license office and providing the option to decline voter registration during their transaction.[25] In 2019, the Colorado legislature changed how Coloradans opt out of automatic voter registration with the opportunity given by postcard notification asking the elector if they would like to decline their voter registration that was implemented during their recent visit to a state medicaid or driver’s license office.[26] The new law began in July of 2020 and according to the bill summary, each unregistered elector who applies for the issuance, renewal, or correction of a driver’s license or identification card through the department of revenue and provides documentation of citizenship, the eligible elector is automatically registered to vote. Automatic voter registration also occurs through the department of health care policy and financing for those unregistered electors who have applied for medicaid.[27] The electronic record of voter registration of applicable electors from the department of revenue (driver’s license, identification card applicants) and the department of health care policy and financing (medicaid applicants) are transferred to the secretary of state. The elector’s county clerk reviews the record for completeness and sends the elector a notice advising the elector they have been registered to vote. The elector can return the notice declining registration, party affiliation, or submitting a necessary signature. If the elector does not decline to be registered within 20 days after the notice is mailed and the notice is not returned to county officials as undeliverable, the elector is then a registered voter.[28]
The National Conference of State Legislatures notes that automatic voter registration leads to cleaner voter registration rolls as the process updates existing registrations with current addresses.[29] A 2018 FiveThirtyEight study found mixed results when analyzing whether voter turnout was higher among those who voluntarily register or those who are subject to automatic voter registration.[30]
Other than the driver’s license office, public assistance locations including services to persons with disabilities, military recruitment offices, or offices that choose to provide voter registration, a Colorado resident can register to vote online through the secretary of state website or by printing a voter registration form, filling it out, and mailing it to the secretary of state or to their local election office. Colorado residents can also register to vote in-person through a voter registration drive. After an election season begins, a Colorado resident can register to vote up to and including election day at a voter service and polling center and then be able to vote in-person.[31]
Voters that are displaced can also register to vote or update their voter registration with any address within a specific county that the individual regularly returns to and has the intent to remain. The address can be a homeless shelter, a homeless service provider, a park, a campground, or any physical location that is regularly returned to. Although to register to vote, the individual must have a valid mailing address for the location or utilize a post office box if the physical location does not have a mailing address.[32]
IDENTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR VOTER REGISTRATION AND IN-PERSON VOTING
Colorado has a non-strict photo identification requirement to register to vote and to vote in person. If an elector does not have a valid Colorado driver’s license or identification card, there are other acceptable forms of identification allowed for voter registration and to vote in-person. If the elector is voting by mail for the first time, the elector may need to provide a photocopy of their identification when the elector returns their ballot.[33]
The Colorado Secretary of State lists the following forms of acceptable identification:[34]
-A valid Colorado driver’s license or valid identification card issued by the Colorado Department of Revenue.
-A valid U.S. passport.
-A valid employee identification card with a photograph of the eligible elector issued by any branch, department, agency, or entity of the U.S. government or of Colorado, or by any county, municipality, board, authority, or other political subdivision of Colorado.
-A valid pilot’s license issued by the federal aviation administration or other authorized agency of the U.S.
-A valid U.S. military identification card with a photograph of the eligible elector.
-A copy of a current (within the last 60 days) utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows the name and address of the elector.
-A Certificate of Degree of Indian or Alaskan Native Blood.
-A valid Medicare or Medicaid card issued by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
-A certified copy of a U.S. birth certificate for the elector.
-Certified documentation of naturalization.
-A valid student identification card with a photograph of the eligible elector issued by an institute of higher education in Colorado.
-A valid veteran identification card issued by the U.S. department of veterans affairs veterans health administration with a photograph of the eligible elector.
-A valid identification card issued by a federally recognized tribal government certifying tribal membership.
The Colorado Secretary of State website also indicates that if an identification form shows an address, the address must be a Colorado location in order to qualify as an acceptable form of identification. For voting, if an individual shows up with an identification that includes an address, such as a driver’s license, the address must be a Colorado location although the address does not need to match what the voter has established for their current record of voter registration.[35] The Colorado Secretary of State also lists the following documents as acceptable forms of identification for voting:
-Verification that a voter is a resident of a group residential facility.
-Verification that a voter is a person committed to the department of human services and confined and eligible to register and vote shall be considered sufficient identification.
-Written correspondence from the county sheriff or his or her designee to the county clerk indicating that a voter is confined in a county jail or detention facility.
Arguments Against Voter ID Laws
At the onset, voter ID laws are perhaps considered by many as reasonable steps to ensure election systems are secure, especially as the act of showing a form of identification is a common everyday occurrence for individuals securing monetary transactions and verifying eligibility for various situations. But what can be considered reasonable can turn into being insidious and egregious by enabling large-scale voter disenfranchisement. Individuals and organizations opposing voter ID laws argue that there are many citizens who do not have the required ID for voting because they cannot afford the underlying documents that are a prerequisite to obtaining a government-issued photo ID. Further, these citizens are disproportionately low-income, racial and ethnic minorities, the elderly, and the disabled.[36] A 2016 Washington Post article highlights the onerous obstacles for many in obtaining a government issued photo ID mainly due to the underlying certified birth certificate requirement. The article highlighted individuals who were elderly, poor, and disabled that did not have the means or ease to locate, obtain, or access their original birth records, locate missing birth records, or the means to clear up deficient records such as birth certificates with clerical errors, misspelled names, or when a family name change occurred when an individual was a child. The article described possible records buried deep in faraway government archives or that were never updated or amended at the time of a name change. One of the individuals highlighted in the article had a failed attempt in obtaining a government issued photo ID by using documentation of his prior voting record amongst other documentation and was facing the prospect of not being able to vote again.[37] What is seemingly shameful for strict photo ID laws is that a significant cost has to be incurred to rectify a situation in order to perform the rightful act of voting. Hence the fundamental right to vote turns into a poll tax albeit indirect, but nonetheless a cost or burden in order to participate in a so-called democracy that is favorable to those of a certain echelon or those with money.
According to a 2017 voter ID fact sheet by the American Civil Liberties Union, seven states have strict photo ID laws requiring voters to present a government-issued photo ID in order to cast a ballot, no exceptions.[38] The ACLU fact sheet lists various studies and research to support its arguments opposing voter ID legislation, one of which is a 2006 Brennan Center for Justice study indicating 11% of U.S. citizens — or more than 21 million adult citizens — do not have a government-issued photo identification. The fact sheet also highlighted a 2014 General Accountability Office study that found strict photo ID laws reduce turnout by 2–3 percentage points and have a depressive effect on turnout among racial minorities and other vulnerable groups. The ACLU also asserts that voter ID requirements are a solution in search of a problem as a 2014 study found that since 2000 there were only 31 credible allegations of voter impersonation, the only type of fraud that photo IDs could prevent — during a period of time in which over one billion ballots were cast. The ACLU further argues that the so-called cases of in-person impersonation voter “fraud” are almost always the product of an honest mistake by an elections worker or a voter, and even those instances are extremely infrequent. Essentially, strict voter ID laws became a cannon to kill a mosquito whose mosquito existence is hardly there to begin with.
The organizations Common Cause and the National Vote At Home Institute recommend that if states do pass voter ID requirements, they should “permit citizens the opportunity to sign an affidavit testifying to their identity and eligibility without having to show a photo ID, given that some might not have the required documentation on hand or transportation access to deliver it to election officials after polls close.”[39]
UPDATING & MAINTAINING THE STATEWIDE VOTER REGISTRATION DATABASE
The statewide Colorado voter registration and election system (also known as SCORE) was implemented in 2008.[40] SCORE is a centralized computerized voter registration master list designed to be HAVA compliant and has interactive use by various state agencies and all 64 counties. It is maintained and administered by the office of the secretary of state. Prior to SCORE being implemented, the voter registration master list was maintained and administered at the county level.[41] To update and maintain the voter registration information on SCORE, election officials and the secretary of state obtain data from numerous sources on a regular basis. For example, data is obtained from the U.S. Postal Service at least once a month to track voter address changes.[42] Addresses are regularly updated using information from both the National Change of Address database and the Colorado Department of Revenue, which receives notices when residents have an updated address during a department of motor vehicle visit. Voting rolls are also examined against the Social Security Index so that deceased individuals can be removed from voter rolls.[43]
The state is also part of the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), a consortium of 30 states that share voter registration information.[44] The organizations Common Cause and the National Vote at Home Institute indicate that through ERIC, Colorado safely exchanges voter registration information with the other participating states and effectively keeps its rolls updated without purging valid Colorado registrants. The organizations explain that ERIC ensures states accurately identify voter matches by lining up information and requiring several data points to be matched before voter roll removal can be initiated. The several data points that need to be matched are first name, last name, middle initial, date of birth, addresses, and the last four digits of social security number (protected with a cryptographic one-way hash). The organizations also argue that the Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck program, housed in Kansas and which Colorado withdrew from in 2019, is unreliable and results in illegal purges from voter registration rolls as it requires fewer data points with those data points being first names, last names, and date of birth. The organizations also indicate data stored at the interstate crosscheck program is unencrypted, leaving it vulnerable to potential hacks and misuse. The organizations further point to research from Harvard University and Stanford showing that the Kansas program when used “makes it 99 percent more likely that a legitimate voter get[s] purged from the rolls than an illegitimate one”.[45]
According to an October 2020 article by Bill Theobald of The Fulcrum, part of Colorado’s proper voter registration list maintenance is sending notices to people who appear to have moved. “Colorado has been among the most aggressive states in this regard, the federal EAC says, although this month the conservative group Judicial Watch filed a federal lawsuit alleging the state had done too little to keep its voter database up to date.”[46] An October 2020 Colorado Politics article reported on the Judicial Watch lawsuit and quoted an expert who indicated that the Judicial Watch claims are misleading. According to the expert in the article, the lawsuit ignores federal requirements for voter removal and just says there are too many people registered to vote. The expert further argues “…the lawsuit is largely conjecture, taking data from sources that measure different things and then mashing it all together to reach conclusions about voter registration numbers.” The article also quotes the Secretary of State spokesperson by stating, “The claims made by this group are based solely on a comparison between real-time voter registration information and outdated census data.”[47] According to Theobald, “Protecting the voter database from hacking and keeping the rolls up-to-date are critical to making mail-in elections credible”. Theobald argues that if lots of ballots are mailed to deceased people, to those who have moved away, or to those that have been sent to prison, those scenarios are not only inefficient but create the possibility of blank ballots being harvested and abused.[48] Colorado’s voter database protocols appear to address and eliminate those concerns expressed by Theobald.
VOTER ENGAGEMENT: MAIL BALLOT & IN-PERSON OPTIONS
Under the Colorado election model, all registered voters are automatically mailed a ballot 22 days before Election Day.[49] For registered voters that have established mail forwarding, a ballot will not reach the voter’s latest mailing address location as the forwarding of ballots by the postal service is not permitted by law.[50]
Voters can track their own mail ballot as a result of a barcode that is specific to the envelope containing the voter’s ballot.[51] A voter’s actual ballot inside the envelope does not have any tracing.[52] Because of the barcode feature to the ballot’s envelope, Colorado voters have a tracking service available to them in all 64 counties and voters can enroll online by visiting the Colorado Secretary of State website or the website of the Clerk and Recorder of the county where the voter resides. The tracking service will notify a voter by phone, email, or text about the status of their ballot from the time it is mailed by their county clerk to when their marked ballot is received and accepted for counting.[53] Tracking allows the voter to know what has or is occurring with their ballot including if the ballot is on the way to the voter and if the ballot has been processed after the voter has mailed or dropped the ballot off.[54]
Before a voter drops off or returns a ballot by mail, the voter will need to sign the back of the envelope that encloses the marked ballot.[55] When election officials begin processing incoming ballots, the voter’s signature on the ballot’s envelope will be verified with what election officials have on file for the voter.[56] If the voter submits the ballot by mail, most Colorado counties will indicate the exact postage required to return it by mail and Colorado counties will cover the cost of postage if the voter fails to provide enough postage.[57] As a popular option, Colorado counties also have manned drive-through drop-offs and video monitored drop-off box locations. For the 2020 election there was a 20 percent increase of ballot drop-off boxes. There is one box for every 9,400 voters.[58] Per Colorado law, drop-off boxes need to be kept under 24-hour surveillance either by person or by video surveillance.[59]
If a Colorado voter prefers to cast their ballot in-person they may do so at a Voter Service and Polling Center located in the county where they reside. When casting a ballot in-person, voters will be asked to present an acceptable form of identification and their voter record status will be updated in the statewide system. If a voter shows up at a voter service center and the registration system indicates the voter had already voted, the voter will not be allowed to vote again. If the voter insists on casting a ballot, the voter will be issued a provisional ballot and the matter will be evaluated by election officials.[60] According to the secretary of state website, a provisional ballot is provided to a voter whose eligibility to vote is not immediately established on Election Day and provisional ballots ensure that every qualified and registered voter can vote a ballot that will be counted. The secretary of state website further states that the most common reasons a voter might be offered a provisional ballot are that the statewide voter registration system indicates a voter already voted and a voter did not present an approved form of identification when required. Provisional ballots are verified and counted after regular ballots and counting is completed and no later than nine days after an election.[61] A 2016 Pew Charitable Trusts briefing indicates that Colorado’s delivery of mail ballots to all voters appears to have contributed to a dramatic reduction in provisional ballots as there were 39,361 in 2010 and 981 in 2014.[62]
VOTERS WITH DISABILITIES
According to the secretary of state website, federal and state laws require that voters with disabilities be able to cast their vote privately and without assistance. In addition, every voter service and polling center must be accessible and have accessible voting machines available. The secretary of state website also indicates each county has bought machines that use assistive and adaptive technology that provide voters with a range of disabilities to vote privately and independently.[63]
Other than using assistive and adaptive technology at a voter service center, disabled voters also have the option to access their ballot electronically and vote within 22 days of Election Day. After completing the ballot electronically, the eligible voter must print the completed ballot, print the accessible ballot application, and sign the application. The signed application and printed electronic ballot will then need to be returned by mail, drop-box, or submitted at a voter service center. For the electronic printed ballot to be counted, it must be received by the county clerk no later than 7:00 PM on Election Day.[64] [65]
During the recent 2021 Colorado legislative session, a law was enacted allowing electronic transmission of ballots for both access and return for voters who are blind, visually impaired, or who are unable to hold or mark a regular ballot. These voters can still print their completed electronic ballot and return by mail but now have the option to return by electronic transmission.[66]
BALLOT PROCESSING BY ELECTION OFFICIALS
In August 2020, Conrad Swanson of the Denver Post described and summarized the main features of Colorado’s ballot processing system as 1) bipartisan teams involved with ballot receiving, transporting, verifying, sorting, and storing; 2) ballot operations done in secure rooms with windows in order to allow for public viewing and transparency; 2) election judges and computers checking each ballot and voter signature against the statewide registry prior to ballots being tabulated, dated, numbered, and stored in boxes; 3) an election process that is not controlled by a single person or political party; and 4) a process that includes checks, balances, and redundancies that guard against fraud, interference, and errors.[67]
According to reporting by Moe Clark of Colorado Newsline, election procedures and security protocols are consistent statewide with minor differences depending on the size of counties and technologies used. Some counties, such as Jefferson and Denver, use ballot sorters while rural counties might utilize more of a manual process. Clark quoted a former Jefferson County election official who indicated procedures and security protocols are dictated by state statute and secretary of state rules. Statewide consistencies include 24-hour surveillance, sealed drop-boxes, and bipartisan teams of election judges or temporary election workers being present and handling ballots.[68] Election workers go through background checks, are trained by county election officials, and when performing duties wear noticeable identification with party affiliation. “For every part of the process, a balance of people from different political parties must be involved.”[69]
Kevin Duggan of the Fort Collins Coloradoan reports that county election officials may begin processing ballots 15 days before Election Day.[70] Conrad Swanson of the Denver Post reports that although ballots can be processed and votes can be entered into counting machines early, results are not tabulated for any given race until after 7:00 PM on Election Day.[71]
After a ballot is turned in by a voter, the ballot will undergo the following administrative processing steps with slight variations from county to county.
- Ballot Transport and Retrieval
Bipartisan transport teams retrieve ballots from locations such as the Post Office, voter service centers, and drop-boxes. During retrieval, ballot boxes or transport bags are sealed and logged by the bipartisan teams. At the county processing center, bipartisan receiving teams verify, break, and log the security seals on the ballot boxes or transport bags to ensure no tampering has occurred during transport.[72] Envelopes to ballots are not opened during transport and retrieval.
2. Ballot Receiving and Updating the Statewide Voter Registration System
Bipartisan teams sort, batch, and time stamp incoming ballots and update the statewide voter registration system which encompasses the ballot tracking system enabling a voter to know if their ballot has been received. This is done by scanning the barcode on the ballot’s envelope. If a voter tries to return more than one ballot, the registration system will not allow a second ballot to be counted. If this situation does occur, the voter’s record will be flagged and the information will be turned over to the county’s District Attorney for investigation.[73] Envelopes to ballots are not opened during receiving and sorting.
3. Signature verification
Next steps include verifying the signature on the outside of the ballot’s return envelope. Signature verification is done by comparing the ballot envelope signature to the voter’s signature that is on file with the statewide voter registration system. Some counties use the same automated technology that banks use to verify signatures.[74] [75] For counties not using automated technology, trained signature verification election judges will compare the ballot envelope signature with the signatures on file in the voter’s record. If the signature on the ballot envelope matches the historical signatures in the voter’s record, the ballot will move forward in processing.
4. Ballot envelopes with no signatures or signatures that are challenged
For signatures on ballot envelopes that have been challenged by automated technology or by trained signature verification judges, the ballots remain in their return envelope and are then examined by a bipartisan team of election judges. Under Colorado law, if both members of a bipartisan team of election judges agree that the signature on the ballot envelope does not match the signature on the voter’s file, election officials cannot accept the ballot for counting. For ballot envelopes that have no signature or have signature challenges, the envelopes to the ballots are kept unopened and the enclosed ballots are not counted until the signature issue is resolved by the voter.[76] A challenged ballot will be held in secure storage until the voter has “cured” the challenge by resolving the signature issue.[77]
County clerks must notify a voter within three days of discovering the discrepancy, but in no event later than two days after Election Day. A voter who has a signature discrepancy is notified by the county clerk via United States mail. The mailed notification from the county clerk to the voter includes an affidavit with instructions on how the voter can return the signed affidavit with a photocopy of an acceptable form of ID to their county election office.[78]
In October 2020, the Colorado Secretary State announced the implementation of the TXT2Cure system for the November 2020 general election.[79] Under the system, the mailed notification also includes instructions for a voter to cure their ballot by a smartphone text option. If a voter chooses to cure the discrepancy by smartphone, the voter will text “Colorado” to 2VOTE (28683) and then click on the link they receive as a reply. The voter will then enter their voter ID number as found on their rejection notice. Next, the voter will then affirm they have submitted a ballot for the election. The voter will then sign the affidavit presented on their smartphone, take a photo of an acceptable form of identification, and then select submit. A voter that has a discrepancy has until eight days after an election to cure their ballot. The Secretary of State press release notes that the systems of TXT2Cure and ballot tracking are independent technologies. A voter that has signed up for the ballot tracking system and whose ballot has been initially rejected by county election judges will not receive an “accepted ballot” notice from the ballot tracking system until the voter cures the signature discrepancy.
Colorado Public Radio reported that TXT2Cure had received mixed reviews in counties that have used it prior to the 2020 statewide general election implementation.[80] Arapahoe County reported significant increases in younger voters curing ballots. Some counties reported the text system generated new unreadable signatures and worthless responses from voters such as voters submitting selfies. Rural counties expressed concerns about a lack of stable cell service or internet that would limit use.
5. Ballot counting
After the signature verification process, ballots are removed from return envelopes in a manner that ensures voter privacy. The ballot is unfolded, checked for issues that may prevent it from going through the counting machine, and placed in a tray for counting. Ballots are run through a counting machine with digital scanners that have undergone rigorous pre-election testing.[81] In Eagle County, ballots are scanned, front and back, and are kept in the exact same order in which they are scanned for accurate retrieval in the post-election audit.[82] After ballots are counted, they are returned to trays that are sealed and cataloged. A strict count of ballots is maintained throughout the process. The chain of custody for the ballots is documented and video cameras record each step in the process. Many Colorado counties broadcast ballot processing by live stream or the public can view through a window.[83]
According to reporting by Moe Clark of Colorado Newsline, if a ballot is damaged — stained with wine or food or is ripped — another bipartisan team will work to scan the ballot and duplicate it. The original is then removed and kept in a secure area in case the ballot is randomly selected during a post-election audit.[84]
According to election procedures of Chaffee County, if a ballot has improper marks, over/under votes, or the voter intent is not clear, the ballot will then be sent electronically to an adjudication team. The adjudication team is a bipartisan team of two election judges that reviews the ballot and determines voter intent. The determination is based on the Voter Intent Guide provided by the secretary of state. The team will mark the ballot digitally and a log of their decisions is attached to the ballot.[85]
6. Tabulation
The results from ballot counting are securely stored on a closed network and not released until 7 p.m. on Election Night. The machines are never connected to the internet.[86] For Chaffee County, ballot tabulation takes place on a tabulation computer located in the ballot counting room. Tabulation is accomplished by collecting the scanned vote results from the high speed scanners. The results are sent to the ballot tabulation computer through an isolated computer network that has no ties to any other network or the internet. The computer collects and compiles all results using Results Tally Reporting (RTR). From RTR, results are printed and downloaded to a secure external drive so the results can be uploaded to the county’s website and the Secretary of State’s Election Night recording site.[87]
BALLOT REJECTION
Prior to the 2020 election, the Colorado Secretary of State indicated through a press release discussing the new text-to-cure system that Colorado had the lowest signature rejection rate of the states that have vote-by-mail for all and the state’s average signature rejection rate had lowered with each election.[88]
For the 2020 election, Colorado rejected nearly 29,000 votes or about 0.9 percent of votes cast. In the vast majority of ballots rejected, the voter’s signature did not match the one in the state’s records.[89] Ballot rejection mostly plagued voters under age 34 and those not affiliated with a major political party. The Colorado Secretary of State indicates 11,085 voters used the text-to-cure system and signature discrepancy accounted for about 75 percent of the rejected ballots. 2,000 ballots arrived after polls closed at 7 pm on Election day. There were also cases where newly registered voters did not provide the required identification.
For the general elections in 2014, 2016, and 2018, Colorado had less than a 1 percent rate in ballot rejection.[90] In 2016, according to statistics reported to the federal Election Assistance Commission, three-quarters of the ballots that were rejected or about 20,000 were because the signature did not match the handwriting on file.[91]
In October 2020, Colorado Public Radio reported on the issue of uncounted votes amongst Colorado’s seven year history of mail ballot elections and noted that election officials have come to accept that thousands of people may be disenfranchised in each mail ballot election when their votes are rejected and voters fail to fix them.[92] The reporting by Colorado Public Radio had the following findings:
“·The rejections happen at considerably different rates from county to county, with disenfranchisement seemingly dependent on a number of variables, including the use of signature review software and the training and opinions of verifiers and election review judges.
·Counties with populations of racial and ethnic minority residents above the state average account for some of the state’s highest rates of rejected ballots. Despite the state’s growing diverse population, most counties send instructions for fixing a rejected ballot only in English.
·Ballots cast by younger voters are discarded at a disproportionate rate, partly thanks to balky signature pads at driver’s license offices. Those record awkwardly scrawled handwriting that doesn’t match a later ink and paper signature on a ballot envelope.
·Disparities in budgets and equipment between counties can lead to wide differences in rejection rates. Those where signatures are first reviewed by machines tend to record far more rejections overall.
·Even when offered the opportunity, few voters fix their signatures or add a missing signature, and political campaigns can be the biggest driver of cures if they are motivated enough by a close race to chase voters down.”
Colorado Public Radio also indicates election officials and experts had difficulty pointing to a single culprit for differences between county to county or commented that it was not appropriate to compare counties as there are too many variables. According to the reporting, there have been no extensive studies done of rejected ballots but the reporting did note that Colorado voters are given time and opportunity to cure a discrepancy and have their votes counted.
The Colorado Secretary of State through the October 2020 press release indicates it closely monitors rejection rates in each of Colorado’s 64 counties and has contacted every county in the state with a signature verification rejection rate higher than 1 percent in the past two elections.[93]
Research by University of Florida political scientist Daniel Smith, conducted in 2018 for the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida and later using more recent Florida election data, indicates younger voters and voters from racial and ethnic minorities are much more likely to have their absentee ballots rejected by state officials.[94] [95] In 2020, Smith and two other political scientists wrote an article for the Washington Post which reported their analysis of mail ballot rejection that occurred in Georgia for the 2018 midterm election. The article noted Georgia does not typically have a large number of mail-in voters and the researchers were able to obtain data from the state voter file that included age, gender, race, registration status, and reasons why the mail ballots were rejected. For the 2018 midterm election, Georgia had about 266,000 registered voters who casted a mail ballot and more than 7,000 of those mail ballots were rejected or nearly 3 percent, either because of an error on the return envelope or because the ballot arrived after Election Day. The researchers found that a disproportionate number of younger voters, people of color and first-time voters had their mail ballots rejected and the reasons were not clear. The researchers speculate that younger voters and first-time registrants may be unfamiliar with how to vote by mail and mail-in voters do not have the benefit of interacting face-to-face with poll workers who might be able to help them navigate any difficulties. But the researchers noted that those reasons do not fully explain why racial and ethnic minorities are less successful with mail voting acceptance. The researchers did note prior research showing that racial and ethnic minorities tend to receive lower-quality services from election officials, at polling places and in other bureaucratic settings and there may be gaps in voter education programs or inconsistencies of the reviewing standards by Georgia’s counties.[96]
For the Colorado election system, Common Cause and the National Vote At Home Institute indicate that the list of voters whose signatures are missing or discrepant is public information and thus available to civic engagement groups and political parties who can then reach out to voters to encourage them to cure their ballots.[97]
VOTER FRAUD
The online database maintained by the conservative based Heritage Foundation shows that since 2006 there are ten Colorado cases of voter fraud categorized as duplicate voting or fraudulent use of absentee ballots that have led to criminal convictions.[98]
According to the October 2020 article by Bill Theobald of The Fulcrum, there have been no credible allegations of voting fraud schemes in Colorado since mail ballot voting was implemented in 2013.[99] Theobald reported that signature matching was a keen interest of Republicans fighting Colorado’s election reform back in 2013 and in 2020, the fight continued as Republicans argued universal mail voting will make it easier for signature fraud by Democrats. According to Theobald, the 2014 election in Colorado muted those concerns as Republican Corey Gardner scored an upset in the Senate race and the GOP won three of the four statewide races.[100]
In May 2020, Shane Monaghan of 5280 reported that if there appears to be evidence of double or illegal voting, the secretary of state can refer the matter to the district attorney for investigation. Monaghan quoted Colorado’s Secretary of State Jenna Griswold who indicated that for the 2018 midterm election, .0027 percent of the more than 2.5 million ballots cast were suspicious enough to refer to the district attorney.[101] From Bill Theobald’s The Fulcrum reporting, the state from the 2018 election heard about 62 scattered cases of potential double voting out of 2.6 million votes cast. No charges were filed.[102] Theobald also highlighted the high profile case of former state GOP Chairman Steve Curtis. In 2016, Curtis was sentenced to four years of probation for forging his ex-wife’s signature and sending in her ballot.[103]
Monaghan also reported that Colorado does work with the five other states that conduct elections primarily by mail in making sure someone is not casting ballots in multiple locations.[104] In June 2020, the Washington Post reported on its analysis of 2016 and 2018 general election data from Colorado, Washington, and Oregon, three vote-by-mail states where all voters proactively receive ballots in the mail. According to Elise Viebeck of the Washington Post, officials from the three states, through their participation with the nonprofit consortium Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), identified 372 possible cases of double voting or voting on behalf of deceased individuals. The 372 possible cases were out of about 14.6 million votes cast in the 2016 and 2018 general elections or a figure of 0.0025 percent of possible fraud. The figure reflects cases referred to law enforcement agencies amongst five elections for the three states. Viebeck noted data came from two ERIC studies for the 2016 and 2018 general elections with Oregon not releasing data from the 2018 election.[105]
On the topic of mass voter fraud and outside election interference, Monaghan also reported that Colorado defends against ballot harvesting with a law limiting the amount of ballots an individual can turn in or drop off which is ten.[106] Monaghan further quoted Secretary of State Jenna Griswold who indicated that because mail-in ballots are analog, it is more difficult for Colorado elections to be hacked or for a bad actor or foreign entity to interfere or undermine the election.[107]
The organizations Common Cause and the National Vote At Home Institute indicate as of 2018, Colorado had updated voting machines in almost every county and the machines are required to be tested by a federally accredited laboratory. In addition, the organizations state that Colorado law mandates that all votes be cast on paper ballots.[108] Marked paper ballots simultaneously and efficiently enable a physical record of the vote, thereby providing a paper trail in the event of a glitch or hack during counting and tabulating and also enabling proficiency during audits or when a recount becomes necessary.
In October 2020, researchers at the American Statistical Association issued a technical report comparing the number of criminal investigations for voter fraud in states that have non-mail ballot elections to those states that have a large number of mail ballot voters including the subset that automatically sends ballots to registered voters. After making the comparisons, the researchers found that overall there was no evidence voting by mail increases the risk of voter fraud. The researchers further stated that if voting by mail creates more opportunities for fraud, those opportunities do not appear to have been realized in the study’s data.[109]
RISK LIMITING AUDITS
According to the organizations Common Cause and the National Vote At Home Institute, Colorado as of 2017 was the first state to require mandatory risk-limiting post-election audits. “A risk-limiting audit is a post-election review that provides strong statistical evidence that the reported outcome is correct and provides a high probability of discovering and correcting a wrong outcome. Audits are like recounts insofar as the ballots are reviewed separately from the voting system’s software. But unlike recounts, they don’t just occur when purported losing candidates request them or when the election results in a tie or razor-thin difference. Instead, they’re conducted as a matter of routine after each election to ensure accuracy. The risk limit of the audit is the largest chance that the audit yields strong evidence of a correct outcome when the reported outcome is, in fact, wrong. Risk-limiting audits conclude in one of two ways: The audit either (a) stops when it finds strong evidence that the reported outcome is correct or (b) fails to find strong evidence that the outcome is correct and evolves into a full hand count of the ballots.”[110]
Derek Hawkins of the Washington Post reported in 2018 that experts widely agree that only risk-limiting audits are comprehensive enough to detect a cyberattack.[111]
After the 2020 election, Austin Lammers of the Colorado News Collaborative reported on Colorado’s first audit process for a presidential election. According to Lammers, the first step in the process was a 10-sided dice rolled 20 times by employees convened at the Secretary of State’s Office. The dice rolling creates a sequence of numbers determining what ballots counties will pull and check to confirm election accuracy. County review boards composed of one Democrat and one Republican manually review the pulled ballots and report the voter markings by inputting the information to the secretary of state’s audit software. “If the markings on those ballots match the outcome recorded by the voting system, that’s good. If they don’t, the audit board compares additional ballots until the outcome is confirmed. This is a comparison risk-limiting audit. Counties with older systems that don’t read or export a voting record use a ballot-polling risk-limiting audit. This audit performs the same process, only the ballots are compared with the sample of the reported winner instead of the voting system, similar to an exit poll.” In the reporting Lammers quoted Ben Adida, executive director of the nonprofit VotingWorks, who said that risk-limiting audits are not conducted because there is a problem, they are conducted to build more confidence in the outcome. Lammers also reported that in the six previous audits that the state had performed, auditors found discrepancies such as dissimilar signatures and circles instead of bubbles but no incorrect outcomes. Lammers quoted Tammy Patrick, a senior elections adviser to the Democracy Fund and former election official, who said, “While these audits rarely discover incorrect outcomes, ballot discrepancies may educate election officials on ways to improve voting instructions and ballot layouts.”[112]
For more detailed information as to Colorado’s implementation of risk limiting audits, see the October 2017 blog post by Colorado election officials to the U.S. Election Administration Commission found at https://www.eac.gov/colorados-implementation-of-risk-limiting-audits.[113]
COST
A 2016 study by the Pew Charitable Trusts examined the costs in running an election before and after Colorado did its election reform switch. The study showed election costs declined 40 percent on average after the reform in 2013. The study examined five categories of cost — printing, labor, rental, postage, and miscellaneous — and the total cost of all the categories per vote was $15.96 in 2008 and in 2014 it was $9.56.[114] [115] Cost savings was attributable to lowered printing costs for provisional ballots and for pre-printed ballots as the need for those items were significantly less and staffing needs were lowered as voter service centers require less temporary employees as compared to traditional precinct polling stations.
Common Cause and the National Vote At Home Institute also mentioned a 2016 Northern Illinois University study that measured 33 variables and ranked Colorado second behind Oregon as to the cost to cast a vote across all 50 states.[116] Oregon and Colorado are amongst the five states that distribute ballots by mail.
VOTER SATISFACTION
The 2016 Pew Charitable Trusts study also did a 1,500 person survey examining voter experience in Colorado. Of those who said they performed mail ballot voting, 95 percent reported a satisfied and very satisfied experience and for those who performed in-person voting, 96 percent indicated the same.[117] [118] Survey results also indicated that nearly two-thirds of the respondents physically returned their ballot (usually to a drop-box) and of those respondents who returned a ballot, 78 percent said it took less than 10 minutes to get to a voter service center or drop-box location.[119]
VOTER TURNOUT
Before Colorado implemented the change to mail ballot voting, the state’s voter participation rate was better than average, according to Bill Theobald of The Fulcrum. “In 2010, the last midterm election under the old system, turnout was 51 percent of those eligible, 6 percentage points above the national average and eighth best among the 50 states.”[120] According to Theobald, for the next midterm election in 2014 which included a highly competitive Senate race, turnout increased to 54 percent and Colorado was №4 nationally. The participation rate continued to grow at 61 percent for the 2018 midterm election which did not include a competitive Senate race.
Stanford University political scientists released in 2020 a working paper that analyzed Colorado’s election results for five elections between 2010 and 2018 and found that voter turnout increased about 9.4 percent after mail ballots were implemented in 2013. “That percentage was even higher among people ages 30 and younger, where they found voter turnout increased by 15 percent. Turnout was also high for blue-collar workers, voters without a high school diploma, those with less wealth, and people of color, the researchers found.”[121]
DOES MAIL BALLOT VOTING IMPACT VOTE SHARE FOR ONE POLITICAL PARTY OVER ANOTHER?
The 2020 Stanford University working paper examining Colorado’s turnout also found that Colorado’s mail ballot voting system did not disproportionately benefit either of the two major political parties but the study did note that the turnout for Independents was nearly 12 percent higher than in previous elections.[122]
Another Stanford University study released in 2020 examined voter data in three states — California, Utah and Washington to determine if mail ballot elections have partisan impacts for one of the major political parties. The three states that were examined had staggered county-level rollouts of vote-by-mail programs which were suitable for the study and “… the researchers found that the introduction of mail-in voting did not have an effect, on average, on the share of voter turnout for either Republicans and Democrats.”[123] Researchers from that study also found that expanding vote-by-mail does not appear to increase vote share for candidates of either political party and that voter turnout modestly increased two percentage points.[124]
In an April 2020 Wired magazine article, Gilad Edelman, covered the Stanford study and the political opposition to vote-by-mail. Edelman noted vote-by-mail has always had a history of partisan twists and wrote how Oregon’s Republican controlled legislature passed a bill in 1995 enacting vote-at-home, only to have it vetoed by Governor John Kitzhaber, a Democrat. Oregon’s Democrats at the time worried that because absentee voting had long been a favorite of older, whiter, Republican leaning voters, vote-at-home would favor Republican candidates. Three years later, voters approved vote-at-home through a ballot initiative.[125]
In the Wired article, Edelman noted studies that measured turnout in Utah and Colorado with results showing turnout boosts that were more pronounced for young voters and independent voters with direct partisan effects being less clear. Although Edelman did argue the results were suggestive as the biggest gains were among young people who overwhelmingly lean liberal which would help Democrats. Edelman next turned to the Stanford working paper and noted that when researchers controlled for trends, the Democratic advantage shrunk to either 0.9 or 1 percent with a 0.4 or 0.5 percent confidence interval. Edelman quoted one of the study’s authors who said they could not rule out that there are some small effects but given the level of uncertainty, they could not say the effect is greater than zero with a high degree of confidence. With a modest pro-Democrat tilt amid high statistical uncertainty, Edelman concluded that on balance, while there is no proof that vote-at-home has a huge benefit for either party, the idea that it helps Democrats more has not been disproven. “What’s clear is that the research is still limited, and that what’s true in the handful of vote-by-mail states doesn’t necessarily predict what would happen elsewhere.”[126]
A May 2020 FiveThirtyEight article examined the nationwide landscape of voting by mail which included states that offer excuse and no-excuse absentee ballots to voters. The article’s author Lee Drutman also examined past voter habits in Florida and Wisconsin. According to Drutman, voting by mail probably increases the likelihood of the marginal Democrat voter engaging in the process although Drutman did note younger and lower-income voters who may vote Democrat typically vote at lower rates and also tend to not take advantage of voting by mail. Drutman also argues that the offset is that voting by mail also makes it easier for more habitual older voters, who tend to vote more Republican. “Thus, on balance, any associated partisan effects from voting by mail have tended to cancel out.” Drutman also argues that we should be careful to apply past patterns to 2020 and suggests that the variations as to how states implement voting by mail (the ease or difficulty in requesting a ballot, prepaid postage, the ease or difficulty in correcting a rejected ballot, and different campaign tactics) will produce a new cottage industry of studies that will refine the understanding of how vote by mail impacts turnout for parties.[127]
In March 2021, the Associated Press reported on a new study by Stanford University indicating that the record rates of mail voting that occurred in 2020 did not have a partisan benefit for Democrats or lead to an increase in voting. “The research is only the latest in a years-long number of studies finding no partisan benefit to mail voting. But it also draws the conclusion that making it easier to vote did not increase voting levels because voters were already highly motivated to participate in the 2020 contest.” According to one of the study’s authors quoted in the Associated Press article, voter interest drove turnout more than the convenience of voting forms. The Associated Press article also mentioned another recent study from Emory University which found that if states encouraged voting by mail in 2020, those states had a sharper increase in turnout than those that did not. But what the article points out as notable is that Democrats did not do any better in those higher turnout states.[128]
In April 2021, Philip Bump of the Washington Post highlighted research from the Public Policy Institute of California that determined the expansion of mail-in voting in 2020 often did not have a significant effect on turnout, with the exception of states that directly mailed ballots to voters. “What’s more, the research found that there was no net benefit to Democrats from the changes relative to prior elections — and, in fact, that there may have been a small advantage for Republicans.” [129] [130]
CONCLUSION & COMMENTARY
The integral value or objective of an election system should be to ensure all citizens have the ability, allowance, capacity, and ease to cast a vote while making sure all votes are securely and efficiently tabulated and accounted for. Colorado’s election officials in recent decades have proven they have met the objectives of the democratic process by being innovative, flexible, pragmatic, and responsive in solving many challenges. Colorado is fortunate to have had election managers, including those from both sides of the political party aisle, who have led the way for a voter experience that is positive, participatory, and in keeping with democratic ideals. As partisan rancor and rhetoric continues to cast a negative veil on processes that involve mail ballot distribution and other issues such as voter identification, the many facets of Colorado’s successful election system prove that opposition arguments are indeed inflated, exaggerated, and unfounded. While Colorado elevated its election system with many successes, what is unfortunate is that many other states have gone the other direction with bipartisan election operations being threatened and diminished and the sanctity of the voter voice from all citizens deemed further eroded. Colorado’s successful voting model needs to permeate nationwide and soon. If not, the democracy under what many consider as the UNITED States will be fully DIVIDED and no longer.
VOTING & ELECTION RESOURCES
Colorado County Clerks Association (CCCA)
https://sites.google.com/a/clerkandrecorder.org/www/home
“The Colorado County Clerks Association (CCCA) is a non-governmental entity; its members consist of the 64 County Clerks of Colorado and their designee.
Each Clerk and Recorder’s Office is responsible for issuing and recording marriage licenses, recording all real estate transactions, issuing liquor licenses, registering voters, conducting all primary, general and county elections, and, when contracted, municipal and school district elections. The Clerk and Recorder’s Office also operates the Motor Vehicle Divisions in the State of Colorado for titling vehicles and issuing license plates.”
Colorado Secretary of State — ACE — Accountability in Colorado Elections
https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/ACE/index.html
This Colorado Secretary of State webpage provides public access to Colorado election data.
Colorado Secretary of State — Elections & Voting
https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/
This portion of the Colorado Secretary of State website is dedicated to providing various information on Colorado’s election and voting processes.
Elections Performance Index — Massachusetts Institute of Technology Election Data & Science Lab
https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/rank
“The Elections Performance Index (EPI) compares election administration policy and performance across the states and from one election cycle to the next.” … “The EPI was first launched in 2013 by the Pew Charitable Trusts, following close consultation and development with an advisory group of leading election officials and academic experts. In 2017, management and development of the EPI passed to the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, which is dedicated to the nonpartisan application of scientific principles to election research and administration.
The index was made possible through the generosity of the Pew Charitable Trusts, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, Democracy Fund, and the provost of MIT.”
Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC)
“The Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) is a non-profit organization with the sole mission of assisting states to improve the accuracy of America’s voter rolls and increase access to voter registration for all eligible citizens. ERIC is governed and managed by states who choose to join, and was formed in 2012 with assistance from The Pew Charitable Trusts.” … “The seven states that pioneered the formation of ERIC in 2012 are: Colorado, Delaware, Maryland, Nevada, Utah, Virginia, and Washington.”
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) State Elections Resources
https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/election-laws-and-procedures-overview.aspx
“NCSL is a bipartisan organization that serves the legislators and staffs of the states, commonwealths and territories. It provides research, technical assistance and opportunities for policymakers to exchange ideas on the most pressing state issues and is an effective and respected advocate for the interests of the states in the American federal system.”
The above NCSL webpage is dedicated to election resources for states.
The following webpage has a 50-state overview of the different voting system standards, testing, and certification standards required or not required by states and the U.S. territories.
United States Elections Project — Michael P. McDonald, PhD., University of Florida, Department of Political Science
http://www.electproject.org/home
“The United States Elections Project is an information source for the United States electoral system. The mission of the project is to provide timely and accurate election statistics, electoral laws, research reports, and other useful information regarding the United States electoral system. By providing this information, the project seeks to inform the people of the United States on how their electoral system works, how it may be improved, and how they can participate in it.”
The Presidential Commission on Election Administration, January 2014
http://web.mit.edu/supportthevoter/www/
“This website is a mirror of the site that used to reside at www.supportthevoter.gov, and reflects the final content on the site. No further maintenance is being done. If you have questions, contact Prof. Charles Stewart III at MIT, cstewart@mit.edu”
The above website includes the final report and recommendations submitted to the President in 2014 on the topic of election administration.
The U.S. Election Assistance Commission
“The U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) was established by the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA). EAC is an independent, bipartisan commission charged with developing guidance to meet HAVA requirements, adopting voluntary voting system guidelines, and serving as a national clearinghouse of information on election administration. EAC also accredits testing laboratories and certifies voting systems, as well as audits the use of HAVA funds.
Other responsibilities include maintaining the national mail voter registration form developed in accordance with the National Voter Registration Act of 1993.
HAVA established the Standards Board and the Board of Advisors to advise EAC. The law also established the Technical Guidelines Development Committee to assist EAC in the development of voluntary voting system guidelines.
The four EAC commissioners are appointed by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. EAC is required to submit an annual report to Congress as well as testify periodically about HAVA progress and related issues. The commission also holds public meetings and hearings to inform the public about its progress and activities.”
BIBLIOGRAPHY
American Civil Liberties Union, Oppose Voter ID Legislation — Fact Sheet, https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet (accessed April 21, 2021).
Auerbach, Jonathan and Steve Pierson. “Does voting by mail increase fraud? Estimating the change in reported voter fraud when states switch to elections by mail.” Office of Science Policy, American Statistical Association. October 26, 2020. https://www.amstat.org/asa/files/pdfs/POL-Vote-by-Mail.pdf (accessed February 26, 2021).
Baringer, Anna, Michael C. Herron, and Daniel A. Smith. “Voting by Mail and Ballot Rejection: Lessons from Florida for Elections in the Age of the Coronavirus.” August 20, 2020. University of Florida. https://electionscience.clas.ufl.edu/2020/04/18/new-paper-voting-by-mail-and-ballot-rejection-lessons-from-florida-for-elections-in-the-age-of-the-coronavirus/ (accessed April 15, 2021).
Brasch, Sam. “Colorado Democrats Want to Make Voter Registration So Automatic, You May Not Realize You’ve Registered.” Colorado Public Radio. April 18, 2019. https://www.cpr.org/2019/04/18/colorado-democrats-want-to-make-voter-registration-so-automatic-you-may-not-realize-youve-registered/ (accessed April 21, 2021).
Bump,Philip. “Research undercuts idea that changes to absentee voting in 2020 benefited Democrats.” The Washington Post. April 14, 2021. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/04/14/new-research-undercuts-idea-that-absentee-voting-changes-2020-benefited-democrats/ (accessed April 28, 2021).
Bunch, Joey. “Colorado bill offers more mail ballots, Election-Day registration.” The Denver Post. April 9, 2013. https://www.denverpost.com/2013/04/09/colorado-bill-offers-more-mail-ballots-election-day-registration/ (accessed March 26, 2021).
Chaffee County Clerk and Recorder — Elections Office. “Elections Procedures, General Election November 3, 2020.” https://chaffeeclerk.colorado.gov/sites/chaffeeclerk/files/Election%20Procedures_1.pdf (accessed April 27, 2021).
Chapman, Allegra, Amber McReynolds, Tierra Bradford, Kiyana Asemanfar, Elena Nunez, and Gerry Langeler. “The Colorado Voting Experience: A Model That Encourages Full Participation.” National Vote At Home Institute, Common Cause Education Fund. November 6, 2018. https://www.commoncause.org/colorado/resource/colorado-voting-experience/ (accessed February 26, 2021).
Clark, Moe. “Here’s A Behind-The Scenes Look At The Journey Your Ballot Takes To Be Counted, Bipartisan election judges undergo FBI background checks and professional training.” Colorado Newsline. October 24, 2020. https://coloradonewsline.com/2020/10/24/heres-a-behind-the-scenes-look-at-the-journey-your-ballot-takes-to-be-counted/ (accessed April 20, 2021).
Colorado General Assembly. “Automatic Voter Registration”. Bill Summary (enacted 2019). SB 19–235, (2019). https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb19-235 (accessed April 21, 2021).
Colorado General Assembly. “Ballot Access for Voters with Disabilities, Concerning allowing a voter with a disability who receives a ballot through an electronic voting device to return the ballot electronically.” Bill Summary (enacted May 21, 2021). SB 21–188, (2021). https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb21-188 (accessed June 16, 2021).
Colorado Secretary of State. “Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold Announces TXT2Cure Program.” Press Release, October 7, 2020. https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/newsRoom/pressReleases/2020/PR20201007TXT2Cure.html (accessed April 7, 2021).
Colorado Secretary of State. “Statewide Voter Registration System, RFP #: DOS-HAVA-0003, Request For Proposals, Document 1 of 2.” April 18, 2006. https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/SCORE/SCOREhome.html (accessed February 14, 2021).
Colorado Secretary of State. Acceptable Forms of Identification. https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/vote/acceptableFormsOfID.html (accessed April 21, 2021).
Colorado Secretary of State. Accessible Voting. https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/accessibleVoting.html (accessed April 21, 2021).
Colorado Secretary of State. Election Day FAQs. https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/FAQs/ElectionDay.html (accessed April 21, 2021).
Colorado Secretary of State. Foreclosure and Homeless Voters FAQs. https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/FAQs/foreclosureHomelessFAQ.html (accessed April 21, 2021).
Colorado Secretary of State. Mail-in Ballots FAQs. https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/FAQs/mailBallotsFAQ.html (accessed April 21, 2021).
Colorado Secretary of State. Provisional Ballots FAQs. https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/FAQs/ProvisionalBallots.html (accessed April 21, 2021).
Colorado Secretary of State. Voter Registration FAQs.[https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/FAQs/VoterRegistrationFAQ.html] (accessed April 21, 2021).
Colorado Secretary of State., Voters with Disabilities FAQs. https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/FAQs/ElectorsWithDisabilities.html (accessed April 21, 20201).
Dremann, Sue. “Mail-in voting has no partisan advantage, Stanford researchers say, Studies find increased turnout, particularly for blue-collar workers, young people.” Palo Alto Weekly, September 8, 2020. https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2020/09/08/mail-in-voting-has-no-partisan-advantage-stanford-researchers-say (accessed February 26, 2021).
Drutman, Lee. “There Is No Evidence That Voting By Mail Gives One Party An Advantage, Could that change this fall?” FiveThirtyEight. May 12, 2020. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/there-is-no-evidence-that-voting-by-mail-gives-one-party-an-advantage/ (accessed March 8, 2021).
Duggan, Kevin. “After 7 years of voting by mail, Colorado voters aren’t taken in by absentee ballot drama.” Fort Collins Coloradoan. October 1, 2020. https://www.coloradoan.com/story/news/2020/10/01/colorado-mail-in-ballot-absentee-voting-how-state-perfected-system/3572176001/ (accessed March 8, 2021).
Edelman, Gilad. “The Weird Partisan Math of Vote-by-Mail, Research says that expanding mail-in voting doesn’t help Democrats. So why are Republicans so afraid of it?” Wired. April 30, 2020. https://www.wired.com/story/weird-partisan-math-vote-by-mail/ (accessed March 8, 2021).
Fish, Sandra. “Updated: Got voting questions? We’ve got answers.” The Colorado Independent. September 22, 2020. https://www.coloradoindependent.com/2020/09/22/updated-got-voting-questions-weve-got-answers/?fbclid=IwAR2NGcXpr0fhYFjFPhPG309Qq9cd-MF4GeTmTljdbLFAVSsFhL7ZEnVN-oo (accessed April 6, 2021).
Frank, John. “Colorado reports nearly 29,000 rejected ballots in the 2020 election, with younger voters the bulk of total, Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold certified the 2020 election and said the state would look at ways to lower rejection rate.” The Colorado Sun. December 9, 2020. https://coloradosun.com/2020/12/09/colorado-rejected-ballots-2020-election/?fbclid=IwAR2fvzq2F1sQOaPa5iU-CzhakNDu24lNEUd6UWMK436OZyHhtKidZ3C31M8 (accessed March 26, 2021).
Formosa, Nicole. “Illegal voting investigation targets hundreds in 12 Colorado counties.” Associated Press. Summit Daily. March 24, 2005. https://www.summitdaily.com/news/illegal-voting-investigation-targets-hundreds-in-12-colorado-counties/ (accessed March 8, 2021).
Goodland, Marianne. “Judicial Watch files lawsuit against state over voter rolls, but it’s misleading, expert says.” Colorado Politics. October 5, 2020. https://www.coloradopolitics.com/news/judicial-watch-files-lawsuit-against-state-over-voter-rolls-but-its-misleading-expert-says/article_bff4452a-0756-11eb-8336-fb9cf431a649.html (accessed April 22, 2021).
Haggard, Lucy. “Fact-check: Colorado makes voting far easier than in Georgia. Here’s how. After MLB moved its All-Star Game from Georgia to Denver’s Coors Field, many have taken to social media to compare and contrast the two systems — but they’ve missed some key details.” The Colorado Sun,. April 6, 2021. https://coloradosun.com/2021/04/06/voting-laws-georgia-colorado/ (accessed April 6, 2021).
Hawkins, Derek. “The Cybersecurity 202: How Colorado became the safest state to cast a vote.” The Washington Post. May 10, 2018. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-cybersecurity-202/2018/05/10/the-cybersecurity-202-how-colorado-became-the-safest-state-to-cast-a-vote/5af317c930fb042db5797427/ (accessed February 24, 2021).
Horwitz, Sari. “Getting a photo ID so you can vote is easy. Unless you’re poor, black, Latino or elderly.” The Washington Post. May 23, 2016. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/getting-a-photo-id-so-you-can-vote-is-easy-unless-youre-poor-black-latino-or-elderly/2016/05/23/8d5474ec-20f0-11e6-8690-f14ca9de2972_story.html (accessed April 21, 2021).
Human,Katy, and Merritt, George.“Voting problems overwhelm city.” The Denver Post. November 6, 2006. https://www.denverpost.com/2006/11/07/voting-problems-overwhelm-city/ (accessed February 26, 2021).
Ingold, John. “Changes in elections sought.” The Denver Post. November 11, 2008. https://www.denverpost.com/2008/11/11/changes-in-elections-sought/ (accessed February 26, 2021).
Johnson, Kirk. “Rise in Voting by Mail Transforms Race in Colorado.” The New York Times. October 16, 2008. https://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/us/politics/17colorado.html (accessed February 26, 2021).
Lammers, Austin. “Colorado takes one final step to verify the vote count. Here’s how an audit works.” The Fort Collins Coloradoan. November 16, 2020. https://www.coloradoan.com/story/news/2020/11/16/colorado-election-integrity-how-vote-counting-audited-risk-limiting/6312747002/ (accessed April 27, 2021).
Larimer County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder. History of Vote Centers. https://www.larimer.org/clerk/elections/resources/history-vote-centers (accessed March 8, 2021).
Markus, Ben. “Uncounted Votes in Colorado: Diverse Areas And Younger Voters More Likely To Have Ballots Rejected.” Colorado Public Radio. October 8, 2020. https://www.cpr.org/2020/10/08/colorado-vote-by-mail-ballots-rejected-signatures/ (accessed February 26, 2021).
McGhee, Eric and Mindy Romero. “Vote-by-Mail Policy and the 2020 Presidential Election.” SSRN. April 13, 20210, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3825939 (accessed April 19, 2021).
Monaghan, Shane. “No, Fraud Isn’t Rampant in Colorado’s Mail-In Voting System.” 5280 Publishing Inc. May 1, 2020. https://www.5280.com/2020/05/no-fraud-isnt-rampant-in-colorados-mail-in-voting-system/ (accessed March 8, 2021).
Moreno, Ivan. “Colorado Democrats Push For Big Election Changes.” The Associated Press, CBS Denver. April 8, 2013. https://denver.cbslocal.com/2013/04/08/colorado-democrats-push-for-big-election-changes/ (accessed March 6, 2021).
National Conference of State Legislatures. “Automatic Voter Registration.” February 8, 2021. https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/automatic-voter-registration.aspx (accessed March 24, 2021).
National Conference of State Legislature. “One Path, Two Forks: Election Overhauls in Colorado and North Carolina.” NCSL The Canvass, States and Elections Reform®️. Issue 42. September 2013. https://www.ncsl.org/documents/legismgt/elect/Canvass_Sept_2013_No_42.pdf (accessed February 24, 2021).
O’Brien, Regina. “O’Brien: How does vote-by-mail actually work?” Vail Daily. September 8, 2020. https://www.vaildaily.com/opinion/obrien-how-does-vote-by-mail-actually-work/ (accessed April 28, 2021).
Phillips, Amber. “What voting by mail looks like when it works.” The Washington Post. June 12, 2020. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/06/12/how-voting-by-mail-works-colorado/ (accessed February 24, 2021).
Rakich, Nathaniel. “What Happened When 2.2 Million People Were Automatically Registered To Vote.” FiveThirtyEight. October 10, 2019. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-happened-when-2-2-million-people-were-automatically-registered-to-vote/ (accessed March 24, 2021).
Riccardi, Nicholas. ”Study: No partisan benefit from mail voting in 2020 election.” The Associated Press. March 5, 2021. https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-coronavirus-pandemic-elections-voting-cfde3aa17d7cecb9e1f2d58f3582dd0d (accessed April 15, 2021).
Shellman, Dwight, and Jennifer Morrell. “Colorado’s Implementation of Risk-Limiting Audits.” U.S. Election Commission. October 30, 2017. https://www.eac.gov/colorados-implementation-of-risk-limiting-audits (accessed May 10, 2021).
Shino, Enrijeta, Mara Suttmann-Lea, and Daniel A. Smith. “Here’s the problem with mail-in ballots: They might not be counted. That’s especially true for younger, minority and first-time voters.” The Washington Post. May 21, 2020. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/05/21/heres-problem-with-mail-in-ballots-they-might-not-be-counted/ (accessed April 20, 2021).
Smith, Daniel A. “Vote-By-Mail Ballots Cast in Florida.” ACLU Florida. September 19, 2018. https://www.aclufl.org/en/publications/vote-mail-ballots-cast-florida (accessed April 15, 2021).
Swanson, Conrad. “Colorado’s vote-by-mail ballots begin life in Washington State and end in storage. Here’s what happens in between.” The Denver Post. August 16, 2020. https://www.denverpost.com/2020/08/16/colorado-denver-mail-voting-usps-2020-election/ (accessed April 27, 2021).
The Heritage Foundation. Election Fraud Cases. https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud/search?state=CO (accessed February 24, 2021).
The Pew Charitable Trusts. “Colorado Voting Reforms: Early Results, 2013 election overhaul has yielded greater efficiency and a better experience for citizens.” March 2016. https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2016/03/colorado-voting-reforms-early-results (accessed February 24, 2021).
Theobald, Bill. “How Colorado Became the Model for Running an Election by Mail.” The Fulcrum. October 20, 2020, https://thefulcrum.us/colorado-vote-by-mail (accessed February 24, 2021).
Tomasic, John. “On Hot-Button Election-Reform Bill, It’s Gessler Versus the Clerks.” The Colorado Independent. May 1, 2013. https://www.coloradoindependent.com/2013/05/01/on-hot-button-election-reform-bill-its-gessler-versus-the-clerks/ (accessed February 26, 2021).
Viebeck, Elise. “Minuscule number of potentially fraudulent ballots in states with universal mail voting undercuts Trump claims about election risks.” The Washington Post. June 6, 2020. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/minuscule-number-of-potentially-fraudulent-ballots-in-states-with-universal-mail-voting-undercuts-trump-claims-about-election-risks/2020/06/08/1e78aa26-a5c5-11ea-bb20-ebf0921f3bbd_story.html (accessed May 10, 2021).
Wong, May. “New research on voting by mail shows neutral partisan effects.” Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research. April 16, 2020. https://siepr.stanford.edu/news/new-research-voting-mail-shows-neutral-partisan-effects (accessed March 8, 2021).
FOOTNOTES / CITATIONS
[1]National Conference of State Legislatures, “One Path, Two Forks: Election Overhauls in Colorado and North Carolina,” NCSL The Canvass, States and Elections Reform®️, Issue 42, September 2013, https://www.ncsl.org/documents/legismgt/elect/Canvass_Sept_2013_No_42.pdf (accessed February 24, 2021).
[2] Allegra Chapman et al, “The Colorado Voting Experience: A Model That Encourages Full Participation,” National Vote At Home Institute, Common Cause Education Fund, November 6, 2018, https://www.commoncause.org/colorado/resource/colorado-voting-experience/ (accessed February 26, 2021).
[3]Colorado Secretary of State, Mail-in Ballots FAQs, https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/FAQs/mailBallotsFAQ.html (accessed April 21, 2021).
[4]The Pew Charitable Trusts, “Colorado Voting Reforms: Early Results, 2013 election overhaul has yielded greater efficiency and a better experience for citizens,” March 2016, https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2016/03/colorado-voting-reforms-early-results (accessed February 24, 2021).
[5]Colorado Secretary of State, Election Day FAQs, https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/FAQs/ElectionDay.html (accessed April 21, 2021).
[6]Colorado Secretary of State, Election Day FAQs.
[7] The Pew Charitable Trusts, “Colorado Voting Reforms: Early Results, 2013 election overhaul has yielded greater efficiency and a better experience for citizens.”
[8] Bill Theobald, “How Colorado became the model for running an election by mail,” The Fulcrum, October 20, 2020, https://thefulcrum.us/colorado-vote-by-mail (accessed February 24, 2021).
[9] Joey Bunch, “Colorado bill offers more mail ballots, Election-Day registration,” The Denver Post, April 9, 2013, https://www.denverpost.com/2013/04/09/colorado-bill-offers-more-mail-ballots-election-day-registration/ (accessed March 26, 2021).
[10]Chapman et al, “The Colorado Voting Experience: A Model That Encourages Full Participation.”
[11] Ivan Moreno, “Colorado Democrats Push For Big Election Changes,” The Associated Press, CBS Denver, April 8, 2013, https://denver.cbslocal.com/2013/04/08/colorado-democrats-push-for-big-election-changes/ (accessed March 6, 2021).
[12] John Tomasic, “On Hot-Button Election-Reform Bill, It’s Gessler Versus the Clerks,” The Colorado Independent, May 1, 2013, https://www.coloradoindependent.com/2013/05/01/on-hot-button-election-reform-bill-its-gessler-versus-the-clerks/ (accessed February 26, 2021).
[13] Kevin Duggan, “After 7 years of voting by mail, Colorado voters aren’t taken in by absentee ballot drama,” Fort Collins Coloradoan, October 1, 2020, https://www.coloradoan.com/story/news/2020/10/01/colorado-mail-in-ballot-absentee-voting-how-state-perfected-system/3572176001/ (accessed March 8, 2021).
[14] Duggan, “After 7 years of voting by mail, Colorado voters aren’t taken in by absentee ballot drama,” under “A system years in the making”.
[15] Larimer County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder, History of Vote Centers, https://www.larimer.org/clerk/elections/resources/history-vote-centers (accessed March 8, 2021).
[16] Theobald, “How Colorado became the model for running an election by mail,” under “Reaction to troubled history”.
[17]Nicole Formosa, “Illegal voting investigation targets hundreds in 12 Colorado counties,” Associated Press, Summit Daily, March 24, 2005, https://www.summitdaily.com/news/illegal-voting-investigation-targets-hundreds-in-12-colorado-counties/ (accessed March 8, 2021).
[18]Katy Human and George Merritt, “Voting problems overwhelm city,” The Denver Post, November 6, 2006, https://www.denverpost.com/2006/11/07/voting-problems-overwhelm-city/ (accessed February 26, 2021).
[19]John Ingold, “Changes in elections sought,” The Denver Post, November 11, 2008, https://www.denverpost.com/2008/11/11/changes-in-elections-sought/ (accessed February 26, 2021).
[20]Kirk Johnson, “Rise in Voting by Mail Transforms Race in Colorado,” The New York Times, October 16, 2008, https://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/us/politics/17colorado.html (accessed February 26, 2021).
[21]Duggan, “After 7 years of voting by mail, Colorado voters aren’t taken in by absentee ballot drama.”
[22]Conrad Swanson, “Colorado’s vote-by-mail ballots begin life in Washington State and end in storage. Here’s what happens in between.” The Denver Post, August 16, 2020, https://www.denverpost.com/2020/08/16/colorado-denver-mail-voting-usps-2020-election/ (accessed April 27, 2021).
[23] Duggan, “After 7 years of voting by mail, Colorado voters aren’t taken in by absentee ballot drama,” under “A system years in the making”.
[24] National Conference of State Legislatures, “Automatic Voter Registration,” February 8, 2021, https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/automatic-voter-registration.aspx (accessed March 24, 2021).
[25] Sam Brasch, “Colorado Democrats Want to Make Voter Registration So Automatic, You May Not Realize You’ve Registered,” Colorado Public Radio, April 18, 2019, https://www.cpr.org/2019/04/18/colorado-democrats-want-to-make-voter-registration-so-automatic-you-may-not-realize-youve-registered/ (accessed April 21, 2021).
[26] Brasch, “Colorado Democrats Want to Make Voter Registration So Automatic, You May Not Realize You’ve Registered.”
[27] Automatic Voter Registration, Bill Summary (as enacted 2019), SB 19–235, Colorado General Assembly, https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb19-235 (accessed April 21, 2021).
[28] Automatic Voter Registration, Bill Summary (as enacted 2019), SB 19–235, Colorado General Assembly.
[29] National Conference of State Legislatures, “Automatic Voter Registration.”
[30] Nathaniel Rakich, “What Happened When 2.2 Million People Were Automatically Registered To Vote,” FiveThirtyEight, October 10, 2019, https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-happened-when-2-2-million-people-were-automatically-registered-to-vote/ (accessed March 24, 2021).
[31] Colorado Secretary of State, Voter Registration FAQs,
[https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/FAQs/VoterRegistrationFAQ.html] (accessed April 21, 2021).
[32] Colorado Secretary of State, Foreclosure and Homeless Voters FAQs, https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/FAQs/foreclosureHomelessFAQ.html (accessed April 21, 2021).
[33] Allegra Chapman et al, “The Colorado Voting Experience: A Model That Encourages Full Participation,” National Vote At Home Institute, Common Cause Education Fund, November 6, 2018, https://www.commoncause.org/colorado/resource/colorado-voting-experience/ (accessed February 26, 2021).
[34] Colorado Secretary of State, Acceptable Forms of Identification, https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/vote/acceptableFormsOfID.html (accessed April 21, 2021).
[35]Colorado Secretary of State, Election Day FAQs, https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/FAQs/ElectionDay.html (accessed April 21, 2021).
[36] American Civil Liberties Union, Oppose Voter ID Legislation — Fact Sheet, https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet (accessed April 21, 2021).
[37]Sari Horwitz, “Getting a photo ID so you can vote is easy. Unless you’re poor, black, Latino or elderly,” The Washington Post, May 23, 2016, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/getting-a-photo-id-so-you-can-vote-is-easy-unless-youre-poor-black-latino-or-elderly/2016/05/23/8d5474ec-20f0-11e6-8690-f14ca9de2972_story.html (accessed April 21, 2021).
[38]American Civil Liberties Union, Oppose Voter ID Legislation — Fact Sheet.
[39]Chapman et al., “The Colorado Voting Experience: A Model That Encourages Full Participation.”
[40]Tomasic, “On Hot-Button Election-Reform Bill, It’s Gessler Versus the Clerks.”
[41]Colorado Secretary of State, “Statewide Voter Registration System, RFP #: DOS-HAVA-0003,
Request For Proposals, Document 1 of 2,” April 18, 2006, https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/SCORE/SCOREhome.html (accessed February 14, 2021).
[42]Amber Phillips, “What voting by mail looks like when it works,” The Washington Post, June 12, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/06/12/how-voting-by-mail-works-colorado/ (accessed February 24, 2021).
[43]Shane Monaghan, “No, Fraud Isn’t Rampant in Colorado’s Mail-In Voting System,” 5280 Publishing Inc., May 1, 2020, https://www.5280.com/2020/05/no-fraud-isnt-rampant-in-colorados-mail-in-voting-system/ (accessed March 8, 2021).
[44]Theobald. “How Colorado Became the Model for Running an Election by Mail.”
[45]Chapman et al., “The Colorado Voting Experience: A Model That Encourages Full Participation.”
[46]Theobald. “How Colorado Became the Model for Running an Election by Mail.”
[47]Marianne Goodland, “Judicial Watch files lawsuit against state over voter rolls, but it’s misleading, expert says,” Colorado Politics, October 5, 2020, https://www.coloradopolitics.com/news/judicial-watch-files-lawsuit-against-state-over-voter-rolls-but-its-misleading-expert-says/article_bff4452a-0756-11eb-8336-fb9cf431a649.html (accessed April 22, 2021).
[48]Theobald. “How Colorado Became the Model for Running an Election by Mail.”
[49]Lucy Haggard, “Fact-check: Colorado makes voting far easier than in Georgia. Here’s how.
After MLB moved its All-Star Game from Georgia to Denver’s Coors Field, many have taken to social media to compare and contrast the two systems — but they’ve missed some key details,” The Colorado Sun, April 6, 2021, https://coloradosun.com/2021/04/06/voting-laws-georgia-colorado/ (accessed April 6, 2021).
[50] Regina O’Brien, “O’Brien: How does vote-by-mail actually work?” Vail Daily, September 8, 2020, https://www.vaildaily.com/opinion/obrien-how-does-vote-by-mail-actually-work/ (accessed April 28, 2021).
[51]Phillips, “What voting by mail looks like when it works.”
[52]Sandra Fish, “Updated: Got voting questions? We’ve got answers.” The Colorado Independent, September 22, 2020, https://www.coloradoindependent.com/2020/09/22/updated-got-voting-questions-weve-got-answers/?fbclid=IwAR2NGcXpr0fhYFjFPhPG309Qq9cd-MF4GeTmTljdbLFAVSsFhL7ZEnVN-oo (accessed April 6, 2021).
[53]Duggan, “After 7 years of voting by mail, Colorado voters aren’t taken in by absentee ballot drama.”
[54]Phillips, “What voting by mail looks like when it works.”
[55]Phillips, “What voting by mail looks like when it works.”
[56]Phillips, “What voting by mail looks like when it works.”
[57]Phillips, “What voting by mail looks like when it works.”
[58]Theobald. “How Colorado Became the Model for Running an Election by Mail.”
[59]Theobald. “How Colorado Became the Model for Running an Election by Mail.”
[60]Duggan, “After 7 years of voting by mail, Colorado voters aren’t taken in by absentee ballot drama.”
[61]Colorado Secretary of State, Provisional Ballots FAQs, https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/FAQs/ProvisionalBallots.html (accessed April 21, 2021).
[62]The Pew Charitable Trusts, “Colorado Voting Reforms: Early Results, 2013 election overhaul has yielded greater efficiency and a better experience for citizens,” March 2016, https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2016/03/colorado-voting-reforms-early-results (accessed February 24, 2021).
[63]Colorado Secretary of State, Voters with Disabilities FAQs, https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/FAQs/ElectorsWithDisabilities.html (accessed April 21, 20201).
[64]Colorado Secretary of State, Voters with Disabilities FAQs.
[65]Colorado Secretary of State, Accessible Voting, https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/accessibleVoting.html (accessed April 21, 2021).
[66]Colorado General Assembly, “Ballot Access for Voters with Disabilities, Concerning allowing a voter with a disability who receives a ballot through an electronic voting device to return the ballot electronically.” Bill Summary (enacted May 21, 2021), SB 21–188, (2021), https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb21-188 (accessed June 16, 2021).
[67]Swanson, “Colorado’s vote-by-mail ballots begin life in Washington State and end in storage. Here’s what happens in between.”
[68]Moe Clark, “Here’s A Behind-The Scenes Look At The Journey Your Ballot Takes To Be Counted, Bipartisan election judges undergo FBI background checks and professional training,” Colorado Newsline, October 24, 2020, https://coloradonewsline.com/2020/10/24/heres-a-behind-the-scenes-look-at-the-journey-your-ballot-takes-to-be-counted/ (accessed April 20, 2021).
[69]Clark, “Here’s A Behind-The Scenes Look At The Journey Your Ballot Takes To Be Counted, Bipartisan election judges undergo FBI background checks and professional training.”
[70]Duggan, “After 7 years of voting by mail, Colorado voters aren’t taken in by absentee ballot drama.”
[71]Swanson, “Colorado’s vote-by-mail ballots begin life in Washington State and end in storage. Here’s what happens in between.”
[72]Regina O’Brien, “O’Brien: How does vote-by-mail actually work?” Vail Daily, September 8, 2020, https://www.vaildaily.com/opinion/obrien-how-does-vote-by-mail-actually-work/ (accessed April 28, 2021).
[73]O’Brien, “O’Brien: How does vote-by-mail actually work?”
[74]Duggan, “After 7 years of voting by mail, Colorado voters aren’t taken in by absentee ballot drama.”
[75]Ben Markus, “Uncounted Votes in Colorado: Diverse Areas And Younger Voters More Likely To Have Ballots Rejected,” Colorado Public Radio, October 8, 2020, https://www.cpr.org/2020/10/08/colorado-vote-by-mail-ballots-rejected-signatures/ (accessed February 26, 2021).
[76]Colorado Secretary of State, “Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold Announces TXT2Cure Program,” Press Release, October 7, 2020, https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/newsRoom/pressReleases/2020/PR20201007TXT2Cure.html (accessed April 7, 2021).
[77]O’Brien, “O’Brien: How does vote-by-mail actually work?”
[78]Colorado Secretary of State, “Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold Announces TXT2Cure Program.”
[79]Colorado Secretary of State, “Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold Announces TXT2Cure Program.”
[80]Ben Markus, “Uncounted Votes in Colorado: Diverse Areas And Younger Voters More Likely To Have Ballots Rejected,” Colorado Public Radio, October 8, 2020, https://www.cpr.org/2020/10/08/colorado-vote-by-mail-ballots-rejected-signatures/ (accessed February 26, 2021).
[81]Clark, “Here’s A Behind-The Scenes Look At The Journey Your Ballot Takes To Be Counted, Bipartisan election judges undergo FBI background checks and professional training.”
[82]O’Brien, “O’Brien: How does vote-by-mail actually work?”
[83]Phillips, Amber. “What voting by mail looks like when it works.”
[84]Clark, “Here’s A Behind-The Scenes Look At The Journey YourBallot TakesTo Be Counted, Bipartisan election judges undergo FBI background checks and professional training.”
[85]Chaffee County Clerk and Recorder — Elections Office, “Elections Procedures, General Election November 3, 2020,” https://chaffeeclerk.colorado.gov/sites/chaffeeclerk/files/Election%20Procedures_1.pdf (accessed April 27, 2021).
[86]Clark, “Here’s A Behind-The Scenes Look At The Journey YourBallot TakesTo Be Counted, Bipartisan election judges undergo FBI background checks and professional training.”
[87]Chaffee County Clerk and Recorder — Elections Office, “Elections Procedures, General Election November 3, 2020.”
[88]Colorado Secretary of State, “Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold Announces TXT2Cure Program.”
[89]John Frank, “Colorado reports nearly 29,000 rejected ballots in the 2020 election, with younger voters the bulk of total, Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold certified the 2020 election and said the state would look at ways to lower rejection rate,” The Colorado Sun, December 9, 2020, https://coloradosun.com/2020/12/09/colorado-rejected-ballots-2020-election/?fbclid=IwAR2fvzq2F1sQOaPa5iU-CzhakNDu24lNEUd6UWMK436OZyHhtKidZ3C31M8 (accessed March 26, 2021).
[90]Theobald, Bill, “How Colorado Became the Model for Running an Election by Mail.”
[91]Theobald, Bill. “How Colorado Became the Model for Running an Election by Mail.”
[92]Markus, Ben. “Uncounted Votes in Colorado: Diverse Areas And Younger Voters More Likely To Have Ballots Rejected.”
[93]Colorado Secretary of State, “Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold Announces TXT2Cure Program.”
[94] Daniel Smith, PhD, “Vote-By-Mail Ballots Cast in Florida,” ACLU Florida, September 19, 2018, https://www.aclufl.org/en/publications/vote-mail-ballots-cast-florida (accessed April 15, 2021).
[95] Anna Baringer et al, “Voting by Mail and Ballot Rejection: Lessons from Florida for Elections in the Age of the Coronavirus,” August 20, 2020, University of Florida, https://electionscience.clas.ufl.edu/2020/04/18/new-paper-voting-by-mail-and-ballot-rejection-lessons-from-florida-for-elections-in-the-age-of-the-coronavirus/ (accessed April 15, 2021).
[96]Enrijeta Shino et al., “Here’s the problem with mail-in ballots: They might not be counted. That’s especially true for younger, minority and first-time voters.” The Washington Post, May 21, 2020 https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/05/21/heres-problem-with-mail-in-ballots-they-might-not-be-counted/ (accessed April 20, 2021).
[97]Chapman et al., “The Colorado Voting Experience: A Model That Encourages Full Participation.”
[98]The Heritage Foundation, Election Fraud Cases, https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud/search?state=CO (accessed February 24, 2021).
[99]Theobald, “How Colorado Became the Model for Running an Election by Mail.”
[100]Theobald, “How Colorado Became the Model for Running an Election by Mail.”
[101]Monaghan, “No, Fraud Isn’t Rampant in Colorado’s Mail-In Voting System.”
[102]Theobald, “How Colorado Became the Model for Running an Election by Mail.”
[103]Theobald, “How Colorado Became the Model for Running an Election by Mail.”
[104]Monaghan, “No, Fraud Isn’t Rampant in Colorado’s Mail-In Voting System.”
[105]Elise Viebeck, “Minuscule number of potentially fraudulent ballots in states with universal mail voting undercuts Trump claims about election risks,” The Washington Post, June 6, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/minuscule-number-of-potentially-fraudulent-ballots-in-states-with-universal-mail-voting-undercuts-trump-claims-about-election-risks/2020/06/08/1e78aa26-a5c5-11ea-bb20-ebf0921f3bbd_story.html (accessed May 10, 2021).
[106]Monaghan, “No, Fraud Isn’t Rampant in Colorado’s Mail-In Voting System.”
[107]Monaghan, “No, Fraud Isn’t Rampant in Colorado’s Mail-In Voting System.”
[108]Chapman et al., “The Colorado Voting Experience: A Model That Encourages Full Participation.”
[109]Jonathan Auerbach and Steve Pierson, “Does voting by mail increase fraud? Estimating the change in reported voter fraud when states switch to elections by mail.” Office of Science Policy, American Statistical Association, October 26, 2020, https://www.amstat.org/asa/files/pdfs/POL-Vote-by-Mail.pdf (accessed February 26, 2021).
[110]Chapman et al., “The Colorado Voting Experience: A Model That Encourages Full Participation.”
[111]Derek Hawkins, “The Cybersecurity 202: How Colorado became the safest state to cast a vote,” The Washington Post, May 10, 2018, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-cybersecurity-202/2018/05/10/the-cybersecurity-202-how-colorado-became-the-safest-state-to-cast-a-vote/5af317c930fb042db5797427/ (accessed February 24, 2021).
[112]Austin Lammers, “Colorado takes one final step to verify the vote count. Here’s how an audit works.” The Fort Collins Coloradoan, November 16, 2020, https://www.coloradoan.com/story/news/2020/11/16/colorado-election-integrity-how-vote-counting-audited-risk-limiting/6312747002/ (accessed April 27, 2021).
[113]Dwight Shellman and Jennifer Morrell, “Colorado’s Implementation of Risk-Limiting Audits.” U.S. Election Commission, October 30, 2017, https://www.eac.gov/colorados-implementation-of-risk-limiting-audits (accessed May 10, 2021).
[114]Theobald, “How Colorado Became the Model for Running an Election by Mail.”
[115]The Pew Charitable Trusts, “Colorado Voting Reforms: Early Results, 2013 election overhaul has yielded greater efficiency and a better experience for citizens.”
[116]Chapman et al., “The Colorado Voting Experience: A Model That Encourages Full Participation.”
[117]Theobald, “How Colorado Became the Model for Running an Election by Mail.”
[118]The Pew Charitable Trusts, “Colorado Voting Reforms: Early Results, 2013 election overhaul has yielded greater efficiency and a better experience for citizens.”
[119]Theobald, “How Colorado Became the Model for Running an Election by Mail.”
[120]Theobald, “How Colorado Became the Model for Running an Election by Mail.”
[121]Sue Dremann, “Mail-in voting has no partisan advantage, Stanford researchers say, Studies find increased turnout, particularly for blue-collar workers, young people,” Palo Alto Weekly, September 8, 2020, https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2020/09/08/mail-in-voting-has-no-partisan-advantage-stanford-researchers-say (accessed February 26, 2021).
[122]Dremann, “Mail-in voting has no partisan advantage, Stanford researchers say, Studies find increased turnout, particularly for blue-collar workers, young people.”
[123]May Wong, “New research on voting by mail shows neutral partisan effects,” Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, April 16, 2020, https://siepr.stanford.edu/news/new-research-voting-mail-shows-neutral-partisan-effects (accessed March 8, 2021).
[124]May Wong, “New research on voting by mail shows neutral partisan effects.”
[125]Gilad Edelman, “The Weird Partisan Math of Vote-by-Mail, Research says that expanding mail-in voting doesn’t help Democrats. So why are Republicans so afraid of it?” Wired, April 30, 2020, https://www.wired.com/story/weird-partisan-math-vote-by-mail/ (accessed March 8, 2021).
[126]Edelman, “The Weird Partisan Math of Vote-by-Mail, Research says that expanding mail-in voting doesn’t help Democrats. So why are Republicans so afraid of it?”
[127] Lee Drutman, “There Is No Evidence That Voting By Mail Gives One Party An Advantage
Could that change this fall?” FiveThirtyEight, May 12, 2020, https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/there-is-no-evidence-that-voting-by-mail-gives-one-party-an-advantage/ (accessed March 8, 2021).
[128]Nicholas Riccardi, ”Study: No partisan benefit from mail voting in 2020 election,” The Associated Press, March 5, 2021, https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-coronavirus-pandemic-elections-voting-cfde3aa17d7cecb9e1f2d58f3582dd0d (accessed April 15, 2021).
[129]Philip Bump, “Research undercuts idea that changes to absentee voting in 2020 benefited Democrats,” The Washington Post, April 14, 2021, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/04/14/new-research-undercuts-idea-that-absentee-voting-changes-2020-benefited-democrats/ (accessed April 28, 2021).
[130]Eric McGhee and Mindy Romero, “Vote-by-Mail Policy and the 2020 Presidential Election,” SSRN, April 13, 20210, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3825939 (accessed April 19, 2021).
Other than an engaged citizenry, Stacie’s favorite things are coffee, tea, trees, composting, dioramas, sanding furniture, biophilic design, creative problem solving, fresh herbs, the color green, & U! She can be reached at StacieJwrites@gmail.com.
