Mail-in voting

Mail-in voting in the United States has roots in the Civil War, when it became necessary to find a way for soldiers, particularly those in the Union army, to participate in elections while stationed away from home. Most of the fighting during the Civil War took place in the South, which meant that southern soldiers, stationed closer to their home states, had easier access to local polling stations. However, Union soldiers from the North, many of whom were deployed far from their home states, faced potential disenfranchisement if they couldn't return home to vote.

Several northern states, including New York, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, passed legislation to allow soldiers to vote absentee, marking a significant evolution in the U.S. electoral process. These absentee ballots could be cast from the battlefield, ensuring that soldiers were still able to participate in democratic elections despite the challenges of war. In some cases, special election officers or proxies were sent to the front lines to collect votes, while other soldiers sent their ballots back home by mail.

While this innovation expanded voting access, it was not without controversy. Critics, particularly in the Democratic Party (today’s Republicans), worried that the process could be vulnerable to fraud, manipulation, or coercion. Some feared that soldiers might be influenced by their superiors to vote a certain way, or that the lack of strict oversight at remote polling locations could lead to tampering with ballots. The concern was particularly strong because of the high political stakes of the Civil War—President Abraham Lincoln, who supported the war effort and the abolition of slavery, was up for re-election in 1864, and the votes of soldiers were seen as crucial to his victory.

Despite these concerns, mail-in voting during the Civil War was largely seen as a success. It allowed a significant portion of the population, who would otherwise have been disenfranchised, to exercise their right to vote, setting a precedent for future expansions of absentee voting in the U.S.

As absentee voting expanded in the 20th century, it wasn't just people with disabilities or those unable to take time off work who benefited from the practice. Wealthy individuals, particularly those who were often away on business, began to take advantage of absentee voting as well. This included many members of the Republican Party, who traditionally had a strong base among business owners and affluent professionals. Their frequent travel for work made it difficult to vote in person, but absentee voting provided a way for them to participate in elections without disrupting their schedules.

The convenience of absentee voting appealed to the business class, as it allowed them to maintain their engagement in the political process even while focusing on their economic interests. This use of absentee voting by the wealthy also contributed to the growing perception that it was not only a method for those facing physical or logistical challenges, but also for those seeking convenience and flexibility.

By the late 20th century, absentee voting had become a well-established part of the U.S. electoral system, embraced across different socio-economic classes and political affiliations.

In the decades leading up to the COVID-19 pandemic, mail-in voting was used more broadly, though it still primarily served people who had legitimate reasons for not voting in person. Historically, both Republicans and Democrats embraced the method. According to data from various states, there was little partisan advantage to mail-in voting—both parties saw it as a way to ensure that their voters, especially those who could not physically go to the polls, could still participate in elections.

For example, states with large rural populations, such as Utah and Montana, relied on mail-in voting as a practical solution for those who lived far from polling places. Traditionally conservative states like Utah embraced the system, and in 2019, Utah became an entirely vote-by-mail state. Similarly, Oregon, a Democratic-leaning state, has conducted all elections by mail since 2000. This method was seen as a way to increase voter turnout by making voting more convenient and accessible.

Prior to the pandemic, there was no significant partisan divide on the issue of mail-in voting. It was used by those who couldn't take time off work, had disabilities, or were otherwise unable to vote in person. This meant that both Democratic and Republican voters regularly used absentee ballots in roughly equal proportions. Veterans, the elderly, college students, and those working long hours in labor-intensive jobs often voted by mail. Moreover, political campaigns of both parties encouraged mail-in voting as a way to ensure their base turned out for elections, especially in tight races where turnout was crucial.

The COVID-19 pandemic, however, changed the political landscape around mail-in voting. With public health concerns about gathering in large crowds at polling stations, many states expanded access to mail-in voting to avoid widespread voter suppression. What had been a relatively non-controversial voting method suddenly became a focal point of partisan debates. While Democrats argued that expanding mail-in voting was necessary to protect public health and ensure everyone could vote safely, many Republicans, led by then-President Donald Trump, began to claim that mail-in voting was a mechanism for electoral manipulation and would lead to widespread fraud, despite evidence to the contrary. He argued that Democrats were pushing for expanded mail-in voting in order to "rig" the election, fueling fears among his supporters that mail-in ballots would undermine the integrity of the election results. His claims were not backed by credible evidence, and numerous studies had shown that voter fraud, including fraud associated with mail-in voting, was exceedingly rare in the U.S. What is true, however, is that historically, higher voter turnout has often favored Democrats. By expanding mail-in voting during the COVID-19 pandemic, many believed that it would lead to a surge in voter participation, particularly among groups that tend to vote Democratic—such as young people, minorities, and lower-income individuals. Trump was concerned that this increase in turnout, made easier by mail-in voting, could work against him.

However, Trump’s constant messaging had a profound impact on Republican voters' trust in the process. Polls showed that, by the time of the election, a significant portion of Republican voters were suspicious of mail-in ballots, and many chose to vote in person, despite the ongoing pandemic. When Trump lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden, his allegations about mail-in voting became central to the broader conspiracy theory that the election had been "stolen" from him. Trump and his allies pointed to the large number of mail-in ballots, which tended to favor Biden, as evidence of fraud. Many states, particularly key battlegrounds like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Georgia, had received record numbers of mail-in ballots due to expanded access during the pandemic. As these ballots were counted after in-person votes, the results began to shift in Biden’s favor, a process that Trump used to fuel claims of impropriety, alleging that the late-counted mail-in ballots were part of a fraudulent scheme.

This rhetoric led to widespread distrust of the election outcome among Trump’s supporters. Conspiracy theories spread, claiming that mail-in ballots were being fabricated, mishandled, or tampered with to ensure Biden’s victory. The baseless allegations culminated in efforts to challenge the election results in court, though these lawsuits were largely dismissed for lack of evidence. Despite numerous recounts and audits confirming the legitimacy of the election results, Trump's claims persisted, and they ultimately contributed to the January 6, 2021, storming of the U.S. Capitol by his supporters, who believed that the election had been stolen through fraudulent mail-in voting practices.

In the years leading up to the 2020 election, Russia had already established a precedent for meddling in U.S. politics. During the 2016 presidential election, Russian operatives, under the direction of the Kremlin, used social media platforms and hacking to interfere with the electoral process, aiming to weaken faith in the U.S. democratic system. Russian disinformation campaigns primarily sought to exploit existing divisions in American society, stoking racial tensions, cultural divides, and political polarization. Their ultimate goal was to destabilize the political landscape, discredit democratic institutions, and erode trust in the election process.

Heading into the 2020 election, Russia continued these efforts. Intelligence reports indicated that Russian operatives were involved in spreading disinformation designed to undermine confidence in the election results. One of the primary targets of this disinformation was the mail-in voting process, which had been expanded significantly due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Russian state-sponsored media outlets, troll farms, and bots amplified Trump's claims that mail-in voting would lead to widespread voter fraud. They echoed the unsubstantiated allegations that mail-in ballots were being fabricated or manipulated and that election officials, especially in key battleground states, were part of a plot to rig the election in favor of Joe Biden.

By amplifying these conspiracy theories, Russia sought to exacerbate the division between Democrats and Republicans over the integrity of the election process. Their efforts contributed to the atmosphere of distrust surrounding mail-in ballots, particularly within Trump’s base, and reinforced the belief that the election was being stolen through fraudulent means. This played directly into the broader Russian strategy of weakening U.S. democracy by fueling internal chaos and eroding confidence in the system.

Russia’s disinformation efforts were particularly effective in the post-election period. After Trump lost the election, his refusal to concede and his continued claims of widespread voter fraud provided fertile ground for Russian-backed disinformation campaigns. Russian operatives continued to promote baseless allegations that mail-in ballots had been tampered with or that late-counted ballots were fraudulent. This contributed to the widespread belief among Trump supporters that the election had been stolen, ultimately culminating in the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. Russian media outlets celebrated the chaos that followed, framing it as evidence that the U.S. democratic system was crumbling from within.

While there is no direct evidence that Russia played an active role in manipulating the voting infrastructure or mail-in ballots, its role in spreading disinformation and amplifying Trump's unfounded claims of election fraud cannot be ignored. Russia’s interference was part of a broader strategy to weaken the United States by exploiting internal divisions, delegitimizing elections, and undermining confidence in democratic institutions. This interference, combined with Trump’s rhetoric about mail-in voting, played a crucial role in shaping the narrative of a stolen election and deepening political polarization in the U.S.

Whether Donald Trump was directly aware of Russia's involvement in spreading disinformation and amplifying claims of election fraud remains a matter of debate. However, there are several points worth noting regarding his awareness of Russia's activities, based on investigations and public statements made by intelligence agencies and the U.S. government.

Trump was certainly made aware of Russia’s interference in U.S. elections as early as his 2016 campaign. The U.S. intelligence community, including agencies like the CIA, FBI, and NSA, unanimously concluded that Russia had interfered in the 2016 election to benefit Trump by using tactics like hacking and spreading disinformation. The Mueller investigation further confirmed Russia's extensive efforts to meddle in the election through social media and cyberattacks on political institutions, notably the Democratic National Committee (DNC). While the Mueller report did not find sufficient evidence to charge members of Trump's campaign with conspiracy, it documented numerous contacts between Trump's campaign officials and Russian individuals.

Despite this, Trump frequently downplayed or outright denied Russia's role in the 2016 election interference. He infamously sided with Russian President Vladimir Putin during a 2018 press conference in Helsinki, stating that he didn’t “see any reason why” Russia would have interfered, despite the conclusions of his own intelligence agencies. This reluctance to acknowledge Russia’s role fueled speculation about whether Trump was unwilling to confront the issue due to a potential benefit from Russia’s interference or out of concern that it might delegitimize his electoral victory.

Leading up to the 2020 election, U.S. intelligence agencies again warned that Russia was actively trying to interfere in the election. In September 2020, then-FBI Director Christopher Wray testified before Congress that Russia was attempting to "influence the U.S. elections primarily by spreading misinformation," particularly through social media, and that these efforts were designed to sow discord and undermine confidence in the election.

Trump was briefed on these findings, but, as in 2016, he largely dismissed concerns about Russia’s interference. Instead, Trump focused on China as a supposed threat to the election, despite the intelligence community's findings that Russia posed the most significant foreign influence threat. Trump and his administration officials publicly downplayed or ignored intelligence reports about Russia’s actions and focused more on allegations of domestic voter fraud, particularly related to mail-in voting, which played into Russia’s disinformation efforts.

As Trump amplified false claims about mail-in voting leading to widespread fraud, Russia’s disinformation campaigns mirrored and amplified his rhetoric. It is unclear whether Trump knew that his messaging aligned with Russian disinformation efforts or if he was merely repeating narratives that coincidentally benefited Russia's goals of undermining U.S. democracy.

Intelligence officials have suggested that while Trump may not have directly collaborated with Russia regarding his post-election claims, he inadvertently served as a conduit for Russian disinformation. The alignment between Trump’s unsubstantiated fraud claims and Russian narratives created a situation where Russia could further destabilize American trust in the election system without needing direct coordination with the Trump campaign.

Following the 2020 election, Trump’s refusal to concede and continued promotion of baseless conspiracy theories about mail-in voting fraud created fertile ground for Russian disinformation campaigns. U.S. intelligence assessments confirmed that Russia continued to push narratives of election fraud, further deepening divisions within the U.S. Despite being aware of intelligence findings that Russia was interfering and amplifying these claims, Trump persisted in promoting these theories, which culminated in the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Despite Trump’s claims, mail-in voting is widely regarded as a safe and secure method of casting ballots in elections, backed by years of research, election oversight, and safeguards implemented across states. Numerous studies and audits, conducted both by independent organizations and government agencies, have consistently found that voter fraud in the U.S., including fraud involving mail-in ballots, is extremely rare. It offers a range of benefits for voters across the political spectrum, and until recently, it had been embraced by both Democrats and Republicans as a convenient and accessible way to participate in elections.

One of the key benefits of mail-in voting is that it can increase voter participation by making voting more accessible. This is particularly important for many Republican-leaning states with large rural populations where traveling to a polling place can be time-consuming and difficult, those who may have difficulty traveling to or standing in line at polling places, regardless of their political affiliation, and those with demanding work schedules that cannot take time off from work to visit polling stations. Additionally, older voters, many of whom lean Republican, are more likely to vote by mail because they may have mobility issues or may prefer the convenience of voting from home. For Democrats, especially in communities where voter suppression has historically been a concern, mail-in voting helps alleviate the barriers that in-person voting can create, such as long lines, limited polling locations, or restrictive ID requirements. It ensures that more voters, particularly from marginalized groups, can participate in elections. For Republicans, especially in areas with vast geographic distances, mail-in voting ensures that rural voters are not disenfranchised by the lack of polling places in their area. This has been particularly useful in traditionally conservative states like Utah, where mail-in voting has been in place for years with broad success and high voter satisfaction.

And, mail-in voting is not unique to the United States. Several other countries around the world have embraced it as a means to expand voter access and increase participation. In Switzerland, for example, all citizens are allowed to vote by mail, and the majority of Swiss voters take advantage of this option, contributing to the country's consistently high voter turnout. In Germany, citizens can request absentee ballots without having to provide a reason, making mail-in voting widely accessible. Canada offers mail-in voting to citizens who are unable to vote in person, a system used by both civilians and members of the military. Similarly, Australia allows voters to apply for postal votes if they cannot make it to a polling station due to travel, work commitments, or health issues. In New Zealand, while most voting is still done in person, mail-in voting is available for those who cannot vote on Election Day. Finland also provides mail-in voting for citizens living abroad or those who are otherwise unable to vote in person.

In each of these countries, like in the U.S., there are safeguards in place to prevent voter fraud, and studies have shown that fraud associated with mail-in voting is exceedingly rare. Many of these nations use mail-in voting to increase access for rural voters, people with disabilities, and individuals with difficult work schedules, much like how mail-in voting traditionally serves those populations in the U.S. These global examples illustrate how mail-in voting is a practical and effective tool for increasing voter participation.

While mail-in voting has been shown to be secure, other practices such as gerrymandering and certain voter suppression tactics are more effective at influencing election outcomes and undermining democratic fairness.

Gerrymandering is the practice of redrawing electoral district boundaries to favor one political party over another. It manipulates the geographic boundaries of voting districts to create an unfair advantage by concentrating or diluting the voting power of particular groups. Both Democrats and Republicans have used gerrymandering to secure electoral victories, but the practice is particularly harmful to democracy because it allows politicians to effectively choose their voters, rather than allowing voters to choose their representatives.

By carving districts in such a way that one party’s supporters are either packed into a single district or spread out across many districts, gerrymandering ensures that even if the opposing party wins more votes overall, they may win fewer seats. This leads to disproportionate representation, where the makeup of legislative bodies does not reflect the actual preferences of the electorate. Gerrymandering often leads to uncompetitive districts where one party is guaranteed to win, reducing voter choice and engagement.

Another practice that can suppress the vote is the introduction of strict voter ID laws. While proponents argue that these laws are necessary to prevent voter fraud, studies have shown that actual instances of in-person voter fraud are extremely rare in the U.S. Voter ID laws disproportionately affect minority groups, the elderly, and lower-income individuals who may have difficulty obtaining the required identification. These laws can create barriers for eligible voters and can depress turnout among communities that traditionally lean toward one party, particularly Democrats.

Voter roll purges—the removal of individuals from voter registration lists—can also contribute to disenfranchisement. While purges are meant to keep voter rolls accurate and up to date, overly aggressive or poorly managed purges can remove eligible voters, especially those who haven’t voted recently. Similarly, polling place closures, often in minority or low-income areas, make it more difficult for certain groups to vote by creating long travel distances and wait times.

So, if both Democrats and Republicans truly wanted fair and democratic elections, they would embrace policies that expand voter access and ensure that every eligible voter can participate without unnecessary barriers. However, some of the very practices they often defend—such as strict voter ID laws, gerrymandering, and voter roll purges—undermine the fairness of elections by suppressing turnout, especially in minority and lower-income communities, while the very practices they oppose—such as mail-in voting—actually increases turnout for everyone.