A recent state court ruling will allow Berks County to handle the fixing of small mistakes on mail ballots by voters the same way it has in past elections.
The elections board received an update regarding the ongoing ballot curing litigation making its way through the state court system and discussed how the county is handling the issue.
The Commonwealth Court ruled Sept. 29 that counties can contact voters to fix minor mistakes that would invalidate their ballot, but they don’t have to. The Republican National Committee, which filed the lawsuit, has announced it will appeal the ruling to the state Supreme Court.
For the time being, however, ballot curing will be permitted. But whether or not voters will have a chance to fix those small mistakes on their ballots will depend on where they live.
Since counties are in charge of running elections, officials from each county will have to decide how to handle curing ballots.
In Berks, voters who cast their ballots by mail are given the chance to fix issues before Election Day if they reach out to the county elections office after being notified of a problem through the state’s SURE database.
First Assistant County Solicitor Cody Kauffman told the commissioners last week that Berks election workers are not contacting voters to alert them of an issue with their ballot.
“However, if a voter contacts the election office about a potential issue with their ballot we will generally afford that voter the opportunity to cure a minor irregularity,” he said.
Kauffman said there are two concerns with implementing a notice to voters. One is the additional strain on the elections office staff, and the second is the risk of not treating voters equitably.
Kauffman said a voter who turns in their ballot earlier would be afforded a chance to make changes, whereas one who turns in a ballot on Election Day would not have that same opportunity.
“I think our current cure procedure is fair, and it’s also consistent with what happens on Election Day at the precincts,” he said. “If a voter has an issue with their ballot and brings it to the attention of a poll worker, they can spoil that ballot and cast a new one.”
Kauffman said there is no clarity in the law and that’s evidenced by county boards throughout Pennsylvania implementing varying degrees of curing.
“This is just one of the many issues that we, like all the other counties, have to take an area of the law that is unclear and do our best to create a fair procedure that accounts for the principles of the election code,” he said.
Commissioner Kevin Barnhardt, chairman of the elections board, said the board received a letter from the Berks County Democratic Party offering to help contact voters who may have made mistakes.
He said it is laudable of the party to support the process of permitting people to exercise their right to vote. However, all three commissioners agreed that allowing any political party to become directly involved in the ballot curing process may present a conflict of interest.
Barnhardt said he would support notifying voters of mistakes only if the county is able to hire additional workers in the elections office, understanding the office is too understaffed to take on a task like this.
“I know for a fact that there are counties in our region that send ballots with mistakes back to the voter,” he said. “They have the bandwidth to do that, so it is not an unheard of practice in the commonwealth.”
Barnhardt said he recognizes Berks does not have the capacity to join the counties that do contact voters.
“We did, however, authorize the hiring of additional election workers through agencies to try to support our staff on a temporary basis,” he said. “I would argue that if we could get a sufficient number of employees, we could designate one of those people to spend time during the week sending those ballots back to the voters.”
Barnhardt made a motion to allow election workers to notify voters of mistakes if the county is able to hire more people. The motion failed for the lack of a second.
Commissioners Chairman Christian Leinbach said he believes the current procedure is fair and consistent. He said that, unfortunately, the lack of clarity in the law is not unique to this one point of the election code.
“It is shocking to me that we are sitting here prior to the 2022 general election and there has been zero election reform since the 2020 general election,” he said. “This is a simple fact. So I cannot, as a member of the election board, support changing what we have historically done.”
Commissioner Michael Rivera agreed with Leinbach.
“I think the process that we use now is fair,” he said.
Rivera added that it would be difficult to implement an equitable procedure that would allow the county to contact voters who have made minor mistakes. For instance, figuring out how to contact voters, whether by phone or email, and how many times would election officials reach out to an individual voter.
Before the discussion among the commissioners about ballot curing took place, six members of the public spoke on the issue. Three said they would like the county to notify voters about minor mistakes on their ballots, while three were against the idea.
Those who were in favor said it was the democratic thing to do and would ensure that every voter’s voice was heard. Those in opposition said the directions included with mail ballots are clear and voters should be expected to follow them.
Source: Berkshire mont
Be First to Comment