Not so long ago, Americans assembled on one designated day — Election Day — to choose our national leaders.

For those unable to cast votes on Election Day, early voting and absentee ballots are available options. In-person early voting has the advantage of the individual citizen at a polling place after check-in by election officials.

Today, however, early voting periods have been stretched to absurd lengths, with some states beginning their voting for the November election more than a month or more in advance. There is no empirical evidence that early voting increases turnout, but it does have serious downsides, including:

    • Producing less-informed voters. After casting an early ballot, a voter checks out of the national debate regardless of what happens. They won’t care about the televised debates, won’t consider options, and won’t fully participate in the political process. Many voters have occasionally complained to election officials and representatives of a desire to recast their vote because they have changed their mind. In most, if not all states, this is impossible to do with early voting.
    • Increasing election administration and campaign costs. Elections that drag on for weeks require the logistical costs of administering an election, including more poll workers and salaries associated with the voting process.
    • Facilitating double voting and vote fraud. Counties that utilize early voting need to have the necessary technology to ensure simultaneous verification and record of vote history. Early voting allows voters to vote anywhere in the county, not simply in their precinct. The jurisdictions must have the necessary voting equipment, statewide registration system, and electronic poll book system to prevent individuals from voting more than once in the state or county during the early voting period. It is also more difficult for political parties to secure sufficient poll watchers to monitor polling places for an extended early voting period.

ACTIVITY

ACRU’s Spakovsky: List of proven vote fraud cases continues to grow

The Heritage Foundation keeps a record of proven, prosecuted cases of vote fraud in the United States. In May, the case number reached 1,285. Most cases have numerous fraud victims, making each a force multiplier for stolen votes. In the last ten years, there are have been at least eight cases where a candidate won with fewer than 17 votes - three where the margin was one vote. Vote fraud is real, and it matters.

Trump Threatens To Withhold Michigan Funding Over ‘Illegal’ Absentee Ballot Plan; MI Sec. State Responds

In a social media post Wednesday, President Trump threatened to withhold federal funding to Michigan for what he described as a “rogue Secretary of State” “illegally” sending absentee ballots to 7.7 million people — a claim prompted by Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s announcement of a plan to send absentee ballot applications to qualified Michigan voters.

  • ACRU logo

Congressional Democrats Remove All Doubt That They Support Vote Fraud

Last minute insertions into the Senate’s Coronavirus relief bill by House Democrats would impose permanent changes to election protocols that will encourage and protect vote fraud. At ACRU, we think it is critically important for all our friends and supporters to understand the seriousness of what is at stake should Nancy Pelosi’s provisions pass Congress.

The Left’s War on Vote Fraud Reform

Pretty soon, the right to cast a meaningful vote might be just a memory. The issue at hand is ensuring that American citizens can exercise the most fundamental civil right of being an American.

Voter ID Terrifies Democrats

The most consequential election in our lifetime is still 10 months away, but it's clear from the Obama administration's order halting South Carolina's new photo ID law that the Democrats already have brought a gun to a knife fight. How else to describe this naked assault on the right of a state to create minimal requirements to curb vote fraud?

Playing the Race Card before Election Day

Is it racist to require people to show a photo ID when they vote? You need a photo ID for nearly any meaningful transaction, such as cashing checks, including government checks. If this simple requirement "suppresses" the vote, maybe we need to ask why it's such a great idea to push for universal suffrage for every adult who is merely breathing. Of course, even this latter requirement would suppress the vote in Chicago and New Orleans, where dead people get to vote all the time - and do so cheerfully.