The United States Postal Service (USPS) has proposed a significant change to its mailing standards that would affect how mail-in ballots are processed. Under the new proposal, voters would be responsible for confirming the date their ballots are received by the postal service, shifting the burden of proof from USPS to the voter.
Explainer As A Former DC Cop, The Federal Takeover Was The Right Move
This change comes as USPS acknowledges that its new mail processing system has altered the reliability of postmarks as proof of receipt. The proposed rule states, "While the presence of a postmark on a mailpiece confirms that the postal service was in possession of the mailpiece on the date of the postmark’s inscription, the postmark date does not inherently or necessarily align with the date on which USPS first accepted possession of a mailpiece."
Voters will have several options to confirm the date of receipt, including obtaining a manual postmark from a postal clerk, purchasing a "Certificate of Mailing," or using registered or certified mail services. This shift could complicate the voting process for many, particularly in states where ballots must be mailed by Election Day to be counted.
The proposed changes are part of USPS's broader restructuring initiative, Delivering for America, which was introduced in 2021. This initiative has faced criticism for delays and mishandling of mail, particularly in regional processing facilities. According to USPS Inspector General reports, these facilities have struggled with efficiency, leading to concerns about the timely delivery of ballots.
Ned Jones, director of the Citizens Election Research Center at the Election Integrity Network, stated, "The Postal Service has become the largest precinct in our elections, and their system is not set up to handle the burden of receiving and delivering millions of ballots."
Critics argue that the new proposal highlights the vulnerabilities associated with mail-in voting. Former President Donald Trump has voiced concerns about election integrity, suggesting that the elimination of mail-in voting could mitigate risks of fraud. He previously issued Executive Order 14248 to address these issues and has called for stricter regulations on mail-in ballots.
Supporters of mail-in voting, however, contend that it is a crucial option for many voters, particularly those unable to vote in person due to health or mobility issues. They argue that the proposed changes could disenfranchise voters who may struggle to provide proof of receipt.
The distinction between postmark dates and the date of first accepted possession of mail could lead to confusion among voters. In 19 states and Washington, D.C., the postmark date is currently used to determine the validity of mail-in ballots. If the proposed changes are implemented, voters in these jurisdictions may find it more challenging to ensure their ballots are counted.
As the USPS continues to navigate the complexities of mail processing amid ongoing restructuring, the implications of this proposal will likely be a topic of debate leading up to the next election cycle. The agency's ability to efficiently manage mail-in ballots will be critical in maintaining voter confidence in the electoral process.
The USPS is accepting public comments on the proposed rule until September 30, 2025, and stakeholders from various sectors are encouraged to weigh in on the potential impact of these changes.
Why it matters
- USPS's proposal shifts the burden of proof for mail-in ballots from the agency to voters, complicating the voting process.
- The change could disenfranchise voters in states relying on postmark dates for ballot validity, raising concerns about election integrity.
- Critics argue the proposal highlights vulnerabilities in mail-in voting, especially amid USPS's ongoing restructuring and efficiency issues.
What’s next
- Public comments on the proposed rule are open until September 30, 2025, inviting stakeholder feedback.
- The implications of the proposal will be debated as the next election cycle approaches, impacting voter confidence.