A significant debate has broken out over voting procedures in the 50 states, although the controversy has probably produced more heat than light.

Let me first start out by reiterating that I do not accept former President Donald Trump’s assertion that the 2020 election was stolen from him.  There is no proof of the level of voter fraud that would have been sufficient to overturn President Biden’s margins in key swing states.  On the available evidence, Joseph R. Biden is our duly elected President.

Nevertheless, 2020 was a different type of election.  While the turnout in the prior three elections was relatively flat (the 2008 election had 131.4 million voters, the 2012 election had 129.1 million and  the 2016 election had 136.8 million), the turnout in 2020, suddenly leaped to over 159 million.  Although  deep affection or disaffection for Donald Trump undoubtedly played a role in hyping participation, it is also true that election procedures were changed in a number of key states.

In Pennsylvania, for example, mail ballots could be requested until election day. Ballots could be counted up to three days after election day, even without a clear postmark.  Drop boxes were permitted, over Republican objections about ballot security   In Michigan, applications for absentee ballots were sent out to all registered voters and not just voters who requested an application.  Residents could register in person on election day.  A number of jurisdictions permitted so-called ballot harvesting, the gathering by third parties of mail in votes.

Even if the many changes cannot be demonstrated to have produced provable fraud, that does not mean  that they are desirable or that they do not add temptation to the process.  Floods of last minute mail votes can defeat signature checking.  Sending ballot applications to those who did not request them produces the possibility of fraudulent applications.  Election day registration is not consistent with verification of the identity of the voter.  Drop boxes certainly present the possibility of fraud when unattended.

Moreover, Democrats have historically opposed much if any voter identification.  (For example, except for first time voters, New Yorkers can show up to the polls and vote just by scrawling a signature next to a name in the books.)   Almost most every democratic nation requires voters to identify themselves, but not in much of the United States.  This is in a country where ID is required, for example, to purchase cigarettes, or to enter federal buildings.

Each no doubt motivated by political self-interest, both Republicans and Democrats have reacted to the vast increase in voter participation in 2020.  Republicans have taken a more restrictive approach in the various states where they control the government, for example strengthening identification requirement, limiting the mailing of ballots to those who request them, restricting drop boxes and to some degree limiting early voting.  Despite claims that these new law are new Jim Crow measures, they really (with a few minor exceptions) tinker around the edges of voting procedures.

Democrats for their parts passed in the House of Representatives HR1, the so-called For the People law, which would federalize voting law, establish automatic voter registration, provide for federal financing of campaigns and disallow partisan redistricting.  This bill will not pass the Senate unless the filibuster rule is repealed or modified.

I do not believe that voting law is properly entrusted to the federal government in most cases, and I think there would be substantial court challenges in the event that the Democratic initiatives were to succeed in Congress and states were required to implement their provisions.

In a less partisan time, what might make sense would be a bipartisan commission that proposes a model voting law to be adopted by various state legislatures that establishes reasonable best practices, for example the number of days of early voting and cutoff dates for registration.  Unfortunately, even though the obvious policy goal is to make voting both relatively easy and very secure, this will continue to be a partisan battleground.