The Secret Ballot and Postal Voting in Other Democracies, 1872–2026

The Secret Ballot and Postal Voting in Other Democracies, 1872–2026

1. Burson v. Freeman, 504 U.S. 191 (1992), plurality opinion

   Supreme Court of the United States (via Caselaw Access Project), 1992-05-26 · supports

   “The opportunities that the viva voce system gave for bribery and intimidation gradually led to its repeal. … State attempts to standardize the ballots were easily thwarted — the vote buyer could simply place a ballot in the hands of the bribed voter and watch until he placed it in the polling box. … Some Australian provinces adopted a series of reforms intended to secure the secrecy of an elector’s vote. … The Australian system was enacted in England in 1872 after a study by the committee of election practices identified Australia’s ballot as the best possible remedy for the existing situation. … Commentators argued that it would diminish the growing evil of bribery by removing the knowledge of whether it had been successful. Another argument strongly urged in favor of the reform was that it would protect the weak and dependent against intimidation and coercion by employers and creditors. … After several failed attempts to adopt the Australian system in Michigan and Wisconsin, the Louisville, Kentucky, municipal government, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and the State of New York adopted the Australian system in 1888. … By 1896, almost 90 percent of the States had adopted the Australian system.”Hide quote

   The opportunities that the viva voce system gave for bribery and intimidation gradually led to its repeal. … State attempts to standardize the ballots were easily thwarted — the vote buyer could simply place a ballot in the hands of the bribed voter and watch until he placed it in the polling box. … Some Australian provinces adopted a series of reforms intended to secure the secrecy of an elector’s vote. … The Australian system was enacted in England in 1872 after a study by the committee of election practices identified Australia’s ballot as the best possible remedy for the existing situation. … Commentators argued that it would diminish the growing evil of bribery by removing the knowledge of whether it had been successful. Another argument strongly urged in favor of the reform was that it would protect the weak and dependent against intimidation and coercion by employers and creditors. … After several failed attempts to adopt the Australian system in Michigan and Wisconsin, the Louisville, Kentucky, municipal government, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and the State of New York adopted the Australian system in 1888. … By 1896, almost 90 percent of the States had adopted the Australian system.

2. Land and Power: Theory and Evidence from Chile (abstract)

   American Economic Review (Baland and Robinson), 2008-12 · supports

   “We examine the effects of the introduction of the secret ballot in Chile in 1958 on voting behavior. Before the reforms, localities with more pervasive patron-client relationships tended to exhibit a much stronger support for the right-wing parties, traditionally associated with the landed oligarchy. After the reform, however, this difference across localities completely disappeared.”Hide quote

   We examine the effects of the introduction of the secret ballot in Chile in 1958 on voting behavior. Before the reforms, localities with more pervasive patron-client relationships tended to exhibit a much stronger support for the right-wing parties, traditionally associated with the landed oligarchy. After the reform, however, this difference across localities completely disappeared.

3. Global postal voting: Special Voting Arrangements data

   International IDEA, 2025-08 · supports

   “Countries that allow in-country postal voting for all voters Canada New Zealand Germany Poland Iceland Switzerland Korea, Republic of United Kingdom Liechtenstein United States Luxembourg Countries that allow in-country postal voting for some voters (based on country-specific criteria) Australia Malaysia Austria Marshall Islands Bangladesh Micronesia, Federated States of Bhutan Netherlands Fiji Pakistan France Palau Greece Papua New Guinea India Slovenia Ireland Spain Japan Zimbabwe Lithuania … Postal data last updated as of 20 August 2025. … The option to correct an invalidly submitted ballot (‘curing the ballot’) is uncommon globally.”Hide quote

   Countries that allow in-country postal voting for all voters Canada New Zealand Germany Poland Iceland Switzerland Korea, Republic of United Kingdom Liechtenstein United States Luxembourg Countries that allow in-country postal voting for some voters (based on country-specific criteria) Australia Malaysia Austria Marshall Islands Bangladesh Micronesia, Federated States of Bhutan Netherlands Fiji Pakistan France Palau Greece Papua New Guinea India Slovenia Ireland Spain Japan Zimbabwe Lithuania … Postal data last updated as of 20 August 2025. … The option to correct an invalidly submitted ballot (‘curing the ballot’) is uncommon globally.

4. Special Voting Arrangements

   International IDEA, 2023-11 · supports

   “International IDEA's comparative SVA data provides insight into postal, early, mobile and proxy voting for in-country voting in 204 countries. … 27% of OECD countries allow in-country postal voting for all voters, while only one country (Liechtenstein) in non-OECD group does the same. In-country postal voting is available for some voters in 24% of OECD countries, while this figure is only 9% in non-OECD countries.”Hide quote

   International IDEA's comparative SVA data provides insight into postal, early, mobile and proxy voting for in-country voting in 204 countries. … 27% of OECD countries allow in-country postal voting for all voters, while only one country (Liechtenstein) in non-OECD group does the same. In-country postal voting is available for some voters in 24% of OECD countries, while this figure is only 9% in non-OECD countries.

5. Question écrite n° 1703 (M. Pierre-Rémy Houssin), réponse du ministère de l'Intérieur

   Assemblée nationale, 1988-08-22 · supports

   “Lors des debats qui ont precede le vote de la loi no 75-1329 du 31 decembre 1975, toutes les tendances politiques representees au Parlement ont unanimement condamne le vote par correspondance, qui etait l'occasion de fraudes graves denoncees apres chaque consultation. Le legislateur a reconnu que cette procedure de vote n'etait pas reellement perfectible, notamment dans la mesure ou elle n'implique a aucun moment la comparution personnelle de l'electeur devant une autorite independante, d'ou la possibilite d'y avoir recours pour faire voter des electeurs fictifs. C'est pourquoi la loi precitee a abroge le vote par correspondance, tout en etendant de facon concomitante le champ d'application du vote par procuration. … Le taux moyen des abstentions municipales generales etait de 23,1 p 100 avant l'intervention de la loi du 31 decembre 1975 ; il est de 21,4 p 100 pour les elections municipales generales qui ont eu lieu depuis lors. Pour les elections presidentielles, les taux homologues sont de 18,4 p 100 et de 16,6 p 100 ; pour les elections cantonales generales, de 39 p 100 et de 33,6 p 100 ; pour les elections legislatives generales, de 21,5 p 100 et de 25,7 p 100.”Hide quote

   Lors des debats qui ont precede le vote de la loi no 75-1329 du 31 decembre 1975, toutes les tendances politiques representees au Parlement ont unanimement condamne le vote par correspondance, qui etait l'occasion de fraudes graves denoncees apres chaque consultation. Le legislateur a reconnu que cette procedure de vote n'etait pas reellement perfectible, notamment dans la mesure ou elle n'implique a aucun moment la comparution personnelle de l'electeur devant une autorite independante, d'ou la possibilite d'y avoir recours pour faire voter des electeurs fictifs. C'est pourquoi la loi precitee a abroge le vote par correspondance, tout en etendant de facon concomitante le champ d'application du vote par procuration. … Le taux moyen des abstentions municipales generales etait de 23,1 p 100 avant l'intervention de la loi du 31 decembre 1975 ; il est de 21,4 p 100 pour les elections municipales generales qui ont eu lieu depuis lors. Pour les elections presidentielles, les taux homologues sont de 18,4 p 100 et de 16,6 p 100 ; pour les elections cantonales generales, de 39 p 100 et de 33,6 p 100 ; pour les elections legislatives generales, de 21,5 p 100 et de 25,7 p 100.

6. Dossier législatif « Vote par correspondance »

   Assemblée nationale, 2022-02-03 · complicates

   “Proposition de loi rejetée par l'Assemblée nationale, visant à rétablir le vote par correspondance le 3 février 2022, T.A. n° 783”Hide quote

   Proposition de loi rejetée par l'Assemblée nationale, visant à rétablir le vote par correspondance le 3 février 2022, T.A. n° 783

7. Proposition de loi organique visant à instaurer le vote par correspondance pour l'élection du Président de la République (ppl23-116)

   Sénat, 2026-10-16 · complicates

   “Cette proposition de loi organique est caduque”Hide quote

   Cette proposition de loi organique est caduque

8. Voting from Abroad answer (France)

   International IDEA, 2013 · supports

   “In 1975, France introduced personal voting and abolished postal voting because of the incidence of fraud (update was conducted in 2013).”Hide quote

   In 1975, France introduced personal voting and abolished postal voting because of the incidence of fraud (update was conducted in 2013).

9. Election Petition Judgment, Bordesley Green and Aston Wards, Birmingham (Richard Mawrey QC), Afterword

   Election Court (unofficial mirror, law.slough.info), 2005-04-04 · supports

   “Anybody who has sat through the case I have just tried and listened to evidence of electoral fraud that would disgrace a banana republic would find this statement surprising. To assert that "The systems already in place to deal with the allegations of electoral fraud are clearly working" indicates a state not simply of complacency but of denial. … All political parties welcomed and supported postal voting on demand. Until very recently, none has treated electoral fraud as representing a problem.”Hide quote

   Anybody who has sat through the case I have just tried and listened to evidence of electoral fraud that would disgrace a banana republic would find this statement surprising. To assert that "The systems already in place to deal with the allegations of electoral fraud are clearly working" indicates a state not simply of complacency but of denial. … All political parties welcomed and supported postal voting on demand. Until very recently, none has treated electoral fraud as representing a problem.

10. Ali v Bashir [2013] EWHC 2572 (QB) (Woking)

    High Court, Election Court (The National Archives, Find Case Law), 2013-07-29 · supports

    “I identified some fourteen different ways in which the system could be successfully defrauded … In that judgment I held that in the two wards concerned (and in all probability in a number of other Birmingham wards) the Labour party candidates and their associates had falsified literally thousands of votes to secure election to the City Council. In the two wards challenged it seemed likely that as many as half the votes cast for the winning candidates had been the product of fraud. … The problem was universal and had the potential to undermine the democratic process. … In 2008 I heard the Slough Election Case. … the main fraud was a fifteenth, the use of false names on the electoral register for which I borrowed the Australian term ‘roll-stuffing’ … the successful candidate and his team had registered several hundred voters in the Central Ward who did not reside at the addresses stated and who, in many cases, were the figments of the candidate’s imagination. 24. As a result, the judgment found the candidate and his associates guilty of corrupt and illegal practices and ordered a new election to be held. … winnowing process of the Scrutiny produced a list of 22 suspect personal votes for Mr Bashir and 64 suspect postal votes. … Consequently I declare the election of Mr Bashir as councillor for the Maybury and Sheerwater Ward of Woking to have been avoided by such corrupt or illegal practices”Hide quote

    I identified some fourteen different ways in which the system could be successfully defrauded … In that judgment I held that in the two wards concerned (and in all probability in a number of other Birmingham wards) the Labour party candidates and their associates had falsified literally thousands of votes to secure election to the City Council. In the two wards challenged it seemed likely that as many as half the votes cast for the winning candidates had been the product of fraud. … The problem was universal and had the potential to undermine the democratic process. … In 2008 I heard the Slough Election Case. … the main fraud was a fifteenth, the use of false names on the electoral register for which I borrowed the Australian term ‘roll-stuffing’ … the successful candidate and his team had registered several hundred voters in the Central Ward who did not reside at the addresses stated and who, in many cases, were the figments of the candidate’s imagination. 24. As a result, the judgment found the candidate and his associates guilty of corrupt and illegal practices and ordered a new election to be held. … winnowing process of the Scrutiny produced a list of 22 suspect personal votes for Mr Bashir and 64 suspect postal votes. … Consequently I declare the election of Mr Bashir as councillor for the Maybury and Sheerwater Ward of Woking to have been avoided by such corrupt or illegal practices

11. Erlam v Rahman [2015] EWHC 1215 (QB) (Tower Hamlets)

    High Court, Election Court (The National Archives, Find Case Law), 2015-04-23 · supports

    “By the 21st century, however, a combination of the extremely lax rules relating to the registration of electors and the introduction of postal voting on demand made personation once again viable. The ease of postal vote fraud and the difficulty of policing it led to such a great upsurge in personation that, in the Birmingham Case, the number of false votes was virtually half of all votes recorded as having been cast for the winning candidates. … Their effect is firstly that Mr Rahman’s election as Mayor on 22 May 2014 was void, that is to say, it is as if it had never taken place.”Hide quote

    By the 21st century, however, a combination of the extremely lax rules relating to the registration of electors and the introduction of postal voting on demand made personation once again viable. The ease of postal vote fraud and the difficulty of policing it led to such a great upsurge in personation that, in the Birmingham Case, the number of false votes was virtually half of all votes recorded as having been cast for the winning candidates. … Their effect is firstly that Mr Rahman’s election as Mayor on 22 May 2014 was void, that is to say, it is as if it had never taken place.

12. Electoral Administration Act 2006, section 14 (Absent voting personal identifiers)

    legislation.gov.uk, 2006 · supports

    “contains the applicant's signature and date of birth and”Hide quote

    contains the applicant's signature and date of birth and

13. Elections Act 2022, Schedule 3

    legislation.gov.uk, 2022 · supports

    “the period ending with the third 31 January following the date on which the application is granted”Hide quote

    the period ending with the third 31 January following the date on which the application is granted

14. Elections Act 2022, section 4

    legislation.gov.uk, 2022 · supports

    “A person who is a political campaigner in respect of a relevant election commits an offence if the person handles a postal voting document that has been issued to another person for use in that election.”Hide quote

    A person who is a political campaigner in respect of a relevant election commits an offence if the person handles a postal voting document that has been issued to another person for use in that election.

15. Electoral fraud data

    Electoral Commission, 2024-12 · contests

    “In the past 5 years, there is no evidence of large-scale electoral fraud. … Of the 1,462 cases of alleged electoral fraud reported to police between 2019 and 2023, 11 led to convictions and the police issued 4 cautions.”Hide quote

    In the past 5 years, there is no evidence of large-scale electoral fraud. … Of the 1,462 cases of alleged electoral fraud reported to police between 2019 and 2023, 11 led to convictions and the police issued 4 cautions.

16. Report on the 2024 UK Parliamentary general election and the May 2024 elections

    Electoral Commission, 2024-11 · complicates

    “Data provided by Returning Officers on the proportion of postal votes rejected (where the personal identifiers of signature and date of birth cannot be verified) shows that levels of rejection are broadly similar to those recorded at previous polls. Overall, at the 2024 general election, 2.2% of returned postal votes (approximately 168,000 votes in total) were rejected and not able to be included in the count. … There was a small number of voters who said they needed help to fill in their ballot paper – 3% of those who voted in person and 3% of those who voted by post. … Another adult insisted on helping 20% 9% me choose who to vote for … We cannot judge from this data the degree to which the voter did not want help or the extent of any input from another person. However, it is possible that some of these instances involved assistance that the voter did not want or which they found coercive. … Our analysis finds that there were no widespread, systemic issues with postal voting and that most people were satisfied with this method of voting. Across the UK, 89% of postal voters told us they were satisfied with the process of voting … There has been a notable increase in the proportion of people registered for a postal vote since the 2019 UK general election – from 18% to 20%. … turnout among postal voters remained high although, as with overall turnout, it dropped in comparison to 2019 (80.7% of postal votes returned in 2024 compared to 83.9% in 2019). … This is probably because postal voting on demand is not available in Northern Ireland … 87% of people said that they thought voting in general was safe from fraud and abuse … This is a positive change from the 2019 general election when 72% said that they thought voting was safe from fraud and abuse.”Hide quote

    Data provided by Returning Officers on the proportion of postal votes rejected (where the personal identifiers of signature and date of birth cannot be verified) shows that levels of rejection are broadly similar to those recorded at previous polls. Overall, at the 2024 general election, 2.2% of returned postal votes (approximately 168,000 votes in total) were rejected and not able to be included in the count. … There was a small number of voters who said they needed help to fill in their ballot paper – 3% of those who voted in person and 3% of those who voted by post. … Another adult insisted on helping 20% 9% me choose who to vote for … We cannot judge from this data the degree to which the voter did not want help or the extent of any input from another person. However, it is possible that some of these instances involved assistance that the voter did not want or which they found coercive. … Our analysis finds that there were no widespread, systemic issues with postal voting and that most people were satisfied with this method of voting. Across the UK, 89% of postal voters told us they were satisfied with the process of voting … There has been a notable increase in the proportion of people registered for a postal vote since the 2019 UK general election – from 18% to 20%. … turnout among postal voters remained high although, as with overall turnout, it dropped in comparison to 2019 (80.7% of postal votes returned in 2024 compared to 83.9% in 2019). … This is probably because postal voting on demand is not available in Northern Ireland … 87% of people said that they thought voting in general was safe from fraud and abuse … This is a positive change from the 2019 general election when 72% said that they thought voting was safe from fraud and abuse.

17. BVerfG, Beschluss des Zweiten Senats, 2 BvC 7/10

    Bundesverfassungsgericht (Federal Constitutional Court of Germany), 2013-07-09 · complicates

    “Damit bedarf die Erteilung eines Wahlscheines als Voraussetzung insbesondere der Briefwahl nicht mehr der Glaubhaftmachung von Gründen. … Bei der Briefwahl ist die öffentliche Kontrolle der Stimmabgabe zurückgenommen (vgl. BVerfGE 123, 39 <75>). Auch ist die Integrität der Wahl nicht gleichermaßen gewährleistet wie bei der Urnenwahl im Wahllokal (vgl. BVerfGE 59, 119 <127>). Die Zulassung der Briefwahl dient aber dem Ziel, eine möglichst umfassende Wahlbeteiligung zu erreichen und damit dem Grundsatz der Allgemeinheit der Wahl Rechnung zu tragen. … Dabei muss er jedoch dafür Sorge tragen, dass keiner der vor allem das Demokratieprinzip konkretisierenden Wahlrechtsgrundsätze unverhältnismäßig eingeschränkt wird oder in erheblichem Umfang leer zu laufen droht (vgl. BVerfGE 59, 119 <125>). Das ist derzeit jedoch offenkundig nicht der Fall. … Dass ein erheblicher Anstieg der Briefwahlbeteiligung durch den Wegfall der Glaubhaftmachung von Antragsgründen jedoch nicht zu befürchten ist”Hide quote

    Damit bedarf die Erteilung eines Wahlscheines als Voraussetzung insbesondere der Briefwahl nicht mehr der Glaubhaftmachung von Gründen. … Bei der Briefwahl ist die öffentliche Kontrolle der Stimmabgabe zurückgenommen (vgl. BVerfGE 123, 39 <75>). Auch ist die Integrität der Wahl nicht gleichermaßen gewährleistet wie bei der Urnenwahl im Wahllokal (vgl. BVerfGE 59, 119 <127>). Die Zulassung der Briefwahl dient aber dem Ziel, eine möglichst umfassende Wahlbeteiligung zu erreichen und damit dem Grundsatz der Allgemeinheit der Wahl Rechnung zu tragen. … Dabei muss er jedoch dafür Sorge tragen, dass keiner der vor allem das Demokratieprinzip konkretisierenden Wahlrechtsgrundsätze unverhältnismäßig eingeschränkt wird oder in erheblichem Umfang leer zu laufen droht (vgl. BVerfGE 59, 119 <125>). Das ist derzeit jedoch offenkundig nicht der Fall. … Dass ein erheblicher Anstieg der Briefwahlbeteiligung durch den Wegfall der Glaubhaftmachung von Antragsgründen jedoch nicht zu befürchten ist

18. How does postal voting work in Switzerland?

    SWI swissinfo.ch, 2026-09-17 · supports

    “It’s estimated that over 90% of voters in Switzerland cast their ballots via mail – a proportion which stands out globally, yet which hasn’t led to major political debates about security or fraud.”Hide quote

    It’s estimated that over 90% of voters in Switzerland cast their ballots via mail – a proportion which stands out globally, yet which hasn’t led to major political debates about security or fraud.

19. How the world’s most frequent voters handle postal ballots

    SWI swissinfo.ch, 2020-10-02 · complicates

    “Cantons report that around 90% of citizens now vote by post, and some have reported figures up to 97% (Aargau, 2017). … In Bern, 300 votes in the 2016 local elections were declared void after investigators discovered they all had the same handwriting”Hide quote

    Cantons report that around 90% of citizens now vote by post, and some have reported figures up to 97% (Aargau, 2017). … In Bern, 300 votes in the 2016 local elections were declared void after investigators discovered they all had the same handwriting

20. Wallis leitet nach Wahlbetrug Administrativuntersuchung ein (SDA)

    SWI swissinfo.ch, 2018-09-20 · complicates

    “Anfang September verurteilte das Bezirksgericht in Brig den angeklagten Wahlfälscher zu zwölf Monaten Gefängnis bedingt mit drei Jahren Bewährung und einer Busse von 2000 Franken. … Der Schwindel flog auf, nachdem 269 Bürger den Gemeinden gemeldet hatten, keine Wahlunterlagen erhalten zu haben. … Die Justiz konnte dem Mann, der zum Zeitpunkt des Wahlbetrugs Mitglied der SVP war, die Fälschung von mindestens 193 Wahlzetteln nachweisen.”Hide quote

    Anfang September verurteilte das Bezirksgericht in Brig den angeklagten Wahlfälscher zu zwölf Monaten Gefängnis bedingt mit drei Jahren Bewährung und einer Busse von 2000 Franken. … Der Schwindel flog auf, nachdem 269 Bürger den Gemeinden gemeldet hatten, keine Wahlunterlagen erhalten zu haben. … Die Justiz konnte dem Mann, der zum Zeitpunkt des Wahlbetrugs Mitglied der SVP war, die Fälschung von mindestens 193 Wahlzetteln nachweisen.

21. The voting experience and beliefs about ballot secrecy

    PLOS ONE (Dowling, Doherty, Hill, Gerber and Huber), 2019-01-07 · supports

    “To investigate these questions, we fielded a survey in December of 2010 through YouGov/Polimetrix, which uses a combination of sampling and matching techniques to approximate a random digit dialing sample. … For example, we asked these voters whether anyone else was in the room with them when they cast their ballot and over 23 percent of respondents said that at least one other person was in the room with them when they filled out their ballot. ... Additionally, 17.2 percent of all respondents who voted by mail said that at least one other person in the room with them while they filled out their ballot was also filling out a ballot, 17.8 percent said they discussed who they were voting for with someone else in the room, and 8.5 percent said they asked someone else for advice about how to vote on a particular race or issue while filling out their ballot. More than six percent of our mail voters reported showing their ballot to someone else after filling it out. … However, Fig 2 shows a clear pattern where those who reported voting by mail harbor greater doubts about secrecy (compared to those who voted in-person on Election Day). They were almost 10 percentage points more likely to say their choices were not kept secret … Only three percent said someone at the polling place asked them who they were voting for and only five percent said that they were able to see who another voter was voting for. However, 22 percent said there was no curtain or privacy screen around their voting space and over 20 percent said that someone walking by could see who they were voting for.”Hide quote

    To investigate these questions, we fielded a survey in December of 2010 through YouGov/Polimetrix, which uses a combination of sampling and matching techniques to approximate a random digit dialing sample. … For example, we asked these voters whether anyone else was in the room with them when they cast their ballot and over 23 percent of respondents said that at least one other person was in the room with them when they filled out their ballot. ... Additionally, 17.2 percent of all respondents who voted by mail said that at least one other person in the room with them while they filled out their ballot was also filling out a ballot, 17.8 percent said they discussed who they were voting for with someone else in the room, and 8.5 percent said they asked someone else for advice about how to vote on a particular race or issue while filling out their ballot. More than six percent of our mail voters reported showing their ballot to someone else after filling it out. … However, Fig 2 shows a clear pattern where those who reported voting by mail harbor greater doubts about secrecy (compared to those who voted in-person on Election Day). They were almost 10 percentage points more likely to say their choices were not kept secret … Only three percent said someone at the polling place asked them who they were voting for and only five percent said that they were able to see who another voter was voting for. However, 22 percent said there was no curtain or privacy screen around their voting space and over 20 percent said that someone walking by could see who they were voting for.

22. Do Perceptions of Ballot Secrecy Influence Turnout? Results from a Field Experiment (NBER Working Paper 17673)

    National Bureau of Economic Research (Gerber, Huber, Doherty, Dowling and Hill), 2011-12 · supports

    “In particular, the experiment shows that providing information about the anonymity of the ballot and the protections against intimidation at the polls to those who had not previously voted increased turnout in the November 2010 election by an estimated 3.4 percentage points. … We find that these letters increased turnout for registered citizens without records of previous turnout, but did not appear to influence the behavior of citizens who had previously voted.”Hide quote

    In particular, the experiment shows that providing information about the anonymity of the ballot and the protections against intimidation at the polls to those who had not previously voted increased turnout in the November 2010 election by an estimated 3.4 percentage points. … We find that these letters increased turnout for registered citizens without records of previous turnout, but did not appear to influence the behavior of citizens who had previously voted.

23. Is There a Secret Ballot? Ballot Secrecy Perceptions and Their Implications for Voting Behaviour (abstract)

    British Journal of Political Science (Gerber, Huber, Doherty and Dowling), 2013 · supports

    “Novel items added to a nationally representative survey show that 25 per cent of respondents report not believing their ballot choices are kept secret and over 70 per cent report sharing their vote choices with others. ... Consistent with this view, regression analysis shows that social forces appear to have a greater effect on vote choices among people who doubt the formal secrecy of the ballot.”Hide quote

    Novel items added to a nationally representative survey show that 25 per cent of respondents report not believing their ballot choices are kept secret and over 70 per cent report sharing their vote choices with others. ... Consistent with this view, regression analysis shows that social forces appear to have a greater effect on vote choices among people who doubt the formal secrecy of the ballot.

24. One-in-Five Mail-In Voters Admit They Cheated in 2020 Election

    Rasmussen Reports, 2023-12-12 · complicates

    “A new national telephone and online survey by Rasmussen Reports and The Heartland Institute finds that 21% of Likely U.S. voters who voted by absentee or mail-in ballot in the 2020 election say they filled out a ballot, in part or in full, on behalf of a friend or family member, such as a spouse or child, while 78% say they didn't. ... The survey of 1,085 U.S. Likely Voters was conducted on November 30-December 6, 2023 by Rasmussen Reports and The Heartland Institute. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC.”Hide quote

    A new national telephone and online survey by Rasmussen Reports and The Heartland Institute finds that 21% of Likely U.S. voters who voted by absentee or mail-in ballot in the 2020 election say they filled out a ballot, in part or in full, on behalf of a friend or family member, such as a spouse or child, while 78% say they didn't. ... The survey of 1,085 U.S. Likely Voters was conducted on November 30-December 6, 2023 by Rasmussen Reports and The Heartland Institute. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC.

25. Toplines - Voters Fraud - Heartland December 2023

    Rasmussen Reports, 2023-12-12 · complicates

    “Did you vote with an absentee or mail-in ballot in the 2020 election? 30% yes 68% no 2% not sure … Answered by the 30% of respondents who voted by absentee or mail-in ballot: During the 2020 election, did a friend or family member fill out your ballot, in part or in full, on your behalf? 19% yes 79% no 2% not sure”Hide quote

    Did you vote with an absentee or mail-in ballot in the 2020 election? 30% yes 68% no 2% not sure … Answered by the 30% of respondents who voted by absentee or mail-in ballot: During the 2020 election, did a friend or family member fill out your ballot, in part or in full, on your behalf? 19% yes 79% no 2% not sure

26. Trump's Latest Bogus Claim About Mail-In Vote Fraud in Pennsylvania

    FactCheck.org, 2024-09-20 · contests

    “"[T]he vast majority of Rasmussen data come from an ordinary opt-in online panel" in which participants actively seek to join rather than being randomly selected, "which AAPOR tells you cannot have a margin of error, because there is no systematic sampling involved," Krosnick said. … According to Jon Krosnick, director of the Political Psychology Research Group at Stanford University, Rasmussen "is known to produce very biased results, typically pro-Republican." … but only 30% of those surveyed responded that they voted in 2020 via absentee or mail-in ballot. So those who said they voted by mail-in ballots represent a subset of the larger polling group. (The Election Assistance Commission reported that about 43% of the electorate voted by mail in 2020. … "[T]he results are wildly out of line with literally all other incoming information, including the rate of ballots flagged in any jurisdiction anywhere in the country for signature mismatches," Levitt told us via email. … "It is indeed perfectly legal in every state to help a disabled person to fill out a mail-in ballot. It's actually protected by federal law."”Hide quote

    "[T]he vast majority of Rasmussen data come from an ordinary opt-in online panel" in which participants actively seek to join rather than being randomly selected, "which AAPOR tells you cannot have a margin of error, because there is no systematic sampling involved," Krosnick said. … According to Jon Krosnick, director of the Political Psychology Research Group at Stanford University, Rasmussen "is known to produce very biased results, typically pro-Republican." … but only 30% of those surveyed responded that they voted in 2020 via absentee or mail-in ballot. So those who said they voted by mail-in ballots represent a subset of the larger polling group. (The Election Assistance Commission reported that about 43% of the electorate voted by mail in 2020. … "[T]he results are wildly out of line with literally all other incoming information, including the rate of ballots flagged in any jurisdiction anywhere in the country for signature mismatches," Levitt told us via email. … "It is indeed perfectly legal in every state to help a disabled person to fill out a mail-in ballot. It's actually protected by federal law."

27. A 'Modern' Democracy That Can't Count Votes

    Los Angeles Times, 2000-12-11 · complicates

    “In a pilot study, Rose gathered preliminary survey data this year on voters in Washington County, outside Portland. About 5% of 818 respondents said other people marked their ballots, and 2.4% said other people signed their ballot envelopes. Rose suspects the real number is higher, because people are reluctant to admit being party to a crime.”Hide quote

    In a pilot study, Rose gathered preliminary survey data this year on voters in Washington County, outside Portland. About 5% of 818 respondents said other people marked their ballots, and 2.4% said other people signed their ballot envelopes. Rose suspects the real number is higher, because people are reluctant to admit being party to a crime.

28. Voting by mail is convenient, but not always secret

    The Conversation (Susan Orr and James Johnson), 2020-08-24 · complicates

    “There is not a lot of research about bribery and coercion in mail-in elections in the U.S. But two surveys undertaken taken after Oregon introduced universal vote by mail in 1998 found that as many as a third of voters completed their votes while others were present. Just 1%, or fewer, reported feeling pressured by the presence of another person.”Hide quote

    There is not a lot of research about bribery and coercion in mail-in elections in the U.S. But two surveys undertaken taken after Oregon introduced universal vote by mail in 1998 found that as many as a third of voters completed their votes while others were present. Just 1%, or fewer, reported feeling pressured by the presence of another person.

29. Mail-in voting lessons from Oregon, the state with the longest history of voting by mail

    The Conversation (Priscilla Southwell), 2020-09-03 · contests

    “Some are concerned that the system provides no guarantee of a secret ballot, but there has been no evidence that undue influence on voters – like bribes or threats – has been a problem in Oregon elections conducted by mail.”Hide quote

    Some are concerned that the system provides no guarantee of a secret ballot, but there has been no evidence that undue influence on voters – like bribes or threats – has been a problem in Oregon elections conducted by mail.

30. Final Report: Westminster General Election July 2024

    Democracy Volunteers, 2024-07-22 · complicates

    “Our team saw family voting in 21% of all the polling stations that we observed. ... In total, 3.5% of all the 20,289 voters we observed voting at these elections were either causing, or were affected by, Family Voting, some 706 people.”Hide quote

    Our team saw family voting in 21% of all the polling stations that we observed. ... In total, 3.5% of all the 20,289 voters we observed voting at these elections were either causing, or were affected by, Family Voting, some 706 people.

31. Democracy Volunteers GE Report 2024 (PDF)

    Democracy Volunteers, 2024-07 · complicates

    “As an unsupervised route for voting, postal voters are potentially subject to intimidation and coercion, family voting, in a similar fashion to what we can observe at polling booths. Due to the nature of this practice, we are unable to collect data on this issue”Hide quote

    As an unsupervised route for voting, postal voters are potentially subject to intimidation and coercion, family voting, in a similar fashion to what we can observe at polling booths. Due to the nature of this practice, we are unable to collect data on this issue

32. Securing the ballot: Report of Sir Eric Pickles' review into electoral fraud

    UK Government (Cabinet Office), 2016-08 · supports

    “Some considered that postal voting should be restricted to those unable to get to a polling station to vote in person for reasons of health or disability. It was argued that unrestricted postal voting undermines the fundamental secrecy of the ballot and that despite existing safeguards can never guarantee that the voter has not been influenced in some way. … The ability to prove undue influence within households is hampered by the reluctance of individuals to report it. Evidence to the review maintained the reasons were considered similar to those which prevent sufferers of domestic abuse from coming forward. … R18. The offences contained in section 66 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 which protect the secrecy of the ballot in relation to in person voting should be extended to postal ballots.”Hide quote

    Some considered that postal voting should be restricted to those unable to get to a polling station to vote in person for reasons of health or disability. It was argued that unrestricted postal voting undermines the fundamental secrecy of the ballot and that despite existing safeguards can never guarantee that the voter has not been influenced in some way. … The ability to prove undue influence within households is hampered by the reluctance of individuals to report it. Evidence to the review maintained the reasons were considered similar to those which prevent sufferers of domestic abuse from coming forward. … R18. The offences contained in section 66 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 which protect the secrecy of the ballot in relation to in person voting should be extended to postal ballots.

33. Research on electoral malpractice (REF 2014 Impact Case Study 43401)

    University of Essex (REF 2014), 2014 · supports

    “In 2004 Birch produced an article for Political Quarterly (co-written with an Essex lawyer, Bob Watt) that considered family voting in the context of remote electronic voting and postal voting. This paper highlighted the potential problems with remote voting, including the loss of ballot secrecy and the possibility of undue influence.”Hide quote

    In 2004 Birch produced an article for Political Quarterly (co-written with an Essex lawyer, Bob Watt) that considered family voting in the context of remote electronic voting and postal voting. This paper highlighted the potential problems with remote voting, including the loss of ballot secrecy and the possibility of undue influence.

34. Wahlberechtigte mit Wahlschein, Wählende mit einfachem und Briefwahlschein seit 1957 (btw_ab57_wahlschein.csv)

    Die Bundeswahlleiterin (Federal Returning Officer), 2025 · supports

    “Wahlberechtigte mit Wahlschein, Wählende mit einfachem und Briefwahlschein seit 1957 … Anteil Wählende mit Briefwahlschein an den Wählenden insgesamt … Bund ;1957;35.400.923 ;33.484.012 ;1.916.911 ;5,4;31.072.894 ;29.311.394 ;94,3;224.406 ;1.537.094 ;4,9;87,8;87,5;91,9; … Bund ;2021;61.172.771 ;37.903.207 ;23.269.564 ;38,0;46.707.343 ;24.501.980 ;52,5;130.321 ;22.075.042 ;47,3;76,4;64,6;95,4; … Bund ;2025;60.510.631 ;40.946.464 ;19.564.167 ;32,3;49.928.653 ;31.263.732 ;62,6;167.125 ;18.497.796 ;37,0;82,5;76,4;95,4;”Hide quote

    Wahlberechtigte mit Wahlschein, Wählende mit einfachem und Briefwahlschein seit 1957 … Anteil Wählende mit Briefwahlschein an den Wählenden insgesamt … Bund ;1957;35.400.923 ;33.484.012 ;1.916.911 ;5,4;31.072.894 ;29.311.394 ;94,3;224.406 ;1.537.094 ;4,9;87,8;87,5;91,9; … Bund ;2021;61.172.771 ;37.903.207 ;23.269.564 ;38,0;46.707.343 ;24.501.980 ;52,5;130.321 ;22.075.042 ;47,3;76,4;64,6;95,4; … Bund ;2025;60.510.631 ;40.946.464 ;19.564.167 ;32,3;49.928.653 ;31.263.732 ;62,6;167.125 ;18.497.796 ;37,0;82,5;76,4;95,4;

35. UK Election Statistics: 1918-2023, A Long Century of Elections (CBP-7529), Table 4

    House of Commons Library, 2023-08-09 · supports

    “Since February 2001 it is possible to get a postal vote on demand; electors no longer have to state a reason for applying for an absent vote or to obtain attestation of illness (etc.) from a medical practitioner or employer. … Table 4: Postal Ballot Papers in UK Elections, 1945-2019 … 1945 1,219,519 1,032,688 1,018,329 83.5% 3.9% 1950 507,717 478,038 466,347 91.9% 1.6% 1951 831,877 756,967 742,574 89.3% 2.5% 1955 595,000 526,904 515,593 86.7% 1.9% 1959 692,827 612,231 598,559 86.4% 2.1% 1964 818,901 723,927 707,636 86.4% 2.5% 1966 617,481 528,006 513,041 83.1% 1.8% 1970 731,249 639,674 625,355 85.5% 2.2% 1974 Feb 743,441 645,080 628,907 84.6% 2.0% 1974 Oct 1,075,131 875,324 850,105 79.1% 2.8% 1979 847,335 714,892 691,969 81.7% 2.2% 1983 757,604 643,634 623,554 82.3% 2.0% 1987 947,948 818,349 793,062 83.7% 2.4% 1992 835,074 714,895 692,139 82.9% 2.0% 1997 937,205 764,366 738,614 78.8% 2.3% 2001 1,758,055 1,402,073 1,402,073 79.8% 5.0% 2005 5,362,501 4,110,039 3,963,792 73.9% 12.7% 2010 6,996,006 5,818,853 5,596,865 80.0% 18.8% 2015 7,592,735 6,516,228 6,302,073 83.0% 20.5% 2017 8,412,060 7,155,315 6,986,581 83.1% 21.7% 2019 8,034,718 6,866,494 6,717,670 83.6% 21.0%”Hide quote

    Since February 2001 it is possible to get a postal vote on demand; electors no longer have to state a reason for applying for an absent vote or to obtain attestation of illness (etc.) from a medical practitioner or employer. … Table 4: Postal Ballot Papers in UK Elections, 1945-2019 … 1945 1,219,519 1,032,688 1,018,329 83.5% 3.9% 1950 507,717 478,038 466,347 91.9% 1.6% 1951 831,877 756,967 742,574 89.3% 2.5% 1955 595,000 526,904 515,593 86.7% 1.9% 1959 692,827 612,231 598,559 86.4% 2.1% 1964 818,901 723,927 707,636 86.4% 2.5% 1966 617,481 528,006 513,041 83.1% 1.8% 1970 731,249 639,674 625,355 85.5% 2.2% 1974 Feb 743,441 645,080 628,907 84.6% 2.0% 1974 Oct 1,075,131 875,324 850,105 79.1% 2.8% 1979 847,335 714,892 691,969 81.7% 2.2% 1983 757,604 643,634 623,554 82.3% 2.0% 1987 947,948 818,349 793,062 83.7% 2.4% 1992 835,074 714,895 692,139 82.9% 2.0% 1997 937,205 764,366 738,614 78.8% 2.3% 2001 1,758,055 1,402,073 1,402,073 79.8% 5.0% 2005 5,362,501 4,110,039 3,963,792 73.9% 12.7% 2010 6,996,006 5,818,853 5,596,865 80.0% 18.8% 2015 7,592,735 6,516,228 6,302,073 83.0% 20.5% 2017 8,412,060 7,155,315 6,986,581 83.1% 21.7% 2019 8,034,718 6,866,494 6,717,670 83.6% 21.0%

Mail Voting in the US: Who Uses It and Its Effects, 2016–2026

1. Election Administration and Voting Survey 2024 Comprehensive Report

   U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 2025-06-30 · supports

   “The majority of voters in the 2024 general election cast their ballots in person, with 35.2% voting in person before Election Day and 37.4% voting in person on Election Day. ... Mail voting comprised 30.3% of the turnout for the 2024 election, which is down from the high water mark for mail voting seen in 2020 (43%) but still larger than the percentage of the electorate that voted by mail in pre-pandemic elections. ... the level of mail voting in 2024 was still elevated compared to pre-pandemic elections; for both 2016 and 2018, mail voting comprised approximately one-quarter of voter turnout.”Hide quote

   The majority of voters in the 2024 general election cast their ballots in person, with 35.2% voting in person before Election Day and 37.4% voting in person on Election Day. ... Mail voting comprised 30.3% of the turnout for the 2024 election, which is down from the high water mark for mail voting seen in 2020 (43%) but still larger than the percentage of the electorate that voted by mail in pre-pandemic elections. ... the level of mail voting in 2024 was still elevated compared to pre-pandemic elections; for both 2016 and 2018, mail voting comprised approximately one-quarter of voter turnout.

2. Election Administration and Voting Survey 2020 Comprehensive Report

   U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 2021-08 · supports

   “In the 2016 EAVS, 54.5% of voters cast their ballots in person on Election Day, and in the 2018 EAVS, 58.2% of voters did so. In 2020, only 30.5% of voters cast their ballots in person on Election Day. ... The percentage of voters who used a mailed ballot to vote surged, from 24.5% in 2016 and 25.6% in 2018 to 43.1% in 2020. ... In 2016, 25.3% of voters cast their ballots early in person, and 22% did so in 2018, compared to 30.6% for the 2020 general election. ... Jurisdiction-level analysis shows that the largest increases in mail voting rates occurred in jurisdictions in states that newly instituted all-mail elections in 2020 and in jurisdictions in states that removed requirements to provide an excuse to request a mailed ballot.”Hide quote

   In the 2016 EAVS, 54.5% of voters cast their ballots in person on Election Day, and in the 2018 EAVS, 58.2% of voters did so. In 2020, only 30.5% of voters cast their ballots in person on Election Day. ... The percentage of voters who used a mailed ballot to vote surged, from 24.5% in 2016 and 25.6% in 2018 to 43.1% in 2020. ... In 2016, 25.3% of voters cast their ballots early in person, and 22% did so in 2018, compared to 30.6% for the 2020 general election. ... Jurisdiction-level analysis shows that the largest increases in mail voting rates occurred in jurisdictions in states that newly instituted all-mail elections in 2020 and in jurisdictions in states that removed requirements to provide an excuse to request a mailed ballot.

3. Election Administration and Voting Survey 2022 Comprehensive Report

   U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 2023-06-29 · supports

   “The use of mail voting decreased for the 2022 general election, at 31.9% of voters, but remains higher than the 25.6% of voters who voted by mail in the 2018 general election. Although use of in-person early voting increased in the 2020 general election to 30.5%, it decreased to 22.2% in the 2022 general election”Hide quote

   The use of mail voting decreased for the 2022 general election, at 31.9% of voters, but remains higher than the 25.6% of voters who voted by mail in the 2018 general election. Although use of in-person early voting increased in the 2020 general election to 30.5%, it decreased to 22.2% in the 2022 general election

4. The Election Administration and Voting Survey: 2016 Comprehensive Report

   U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 2017-06-29 · complicates

   “In 2016, 41.3 percent of all ballots were cast before Election Day. Of the total turnout, 17.2 percent of ballots were cast using in-person early voting and 23.7 percent were cast using by-mail absentee voting.”Hide quote

   In 2016, 41.3 percent of all ballots were cast before Election Day. Of the total turnout, 17.2 percent of ballots were cast using in-person early voting and 23.7 percent were cast using by-mail absentee voting.

5. Election Administration and Voting Survey 2024 Comprehensive Report, Overview Table 1

   U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 2025-06-30 · supports

   “Overview Table 1: Mail Voting in the 2024 General Election ... % Turnout by Mail ... Alabama 5.5% ... Alaska [1] 14.3% ... American Samoa [2] 1.9% ... Arizona [3] 74.7% ... Arkansas 2.1% ... California 80.8% ... Colorado [4] 91.3% ... Connecticut 6.5% ... Delaware 6.5% ... District of Columbia 51.1% ... Florida [5] 26.8% ... Georgia [6] 5.1% ... Guam [7] 0.3% ... Hawaii 92.5% ... Idaho [8] 19.6% ... Illinois [9] 17.8% ... Indiana [10] 53.7% ... Iowa -- ... Kansas 11.0% ... Kentucky 5.6% ... Louisiana [11] 5.9% ... Maine [12] 25.5% ... Maryland 24.6% ... Massachusetts [13] 33.4% ... Michigan 35.4% ... Minnesota 13.7% ... Mississippi [14] -- ... Missouri 5.7% ... Montana [15] -- ... Nebraska [16] 31.8% ... Nevada 44.1% ... New Hampshire 11.2% ... New Jersey [17] 19.2% ... New Mexico 12.0% ... New York 10.0% ... North Carolina [18] 5.2% ... North Dakota 24.0% ... Northern Mariana Islands 7.3% ... Ohio 18.1% ... Oklahoma 6.3% ... Oregon [19] 99.3% ... Pennsylvania [20] 27.3% ... Puerto Rico [21] 10.3% ... Rhode Island 10.0% ... South Carolina 3.8% ... South Dakota 36.6% ... Tennessee 2.8% ... Texas 3.3% ... U.S. Virgin Islands 3.8% ... Utah 91.5% ... Vermont [22] 64.7% ... Virginia 10.5% ... Washington [23] 98.5% ... West Virginia 2.9% ... Wisconsin [24] 16.6% ... Wyoming 14.1% ... U.S. Total 30.3% ... % Turnout by Mail uses (F1d+F1g)/F1a x 100.”Hide quote

   Overview Table 1: Mail Voting in the 2024 General Election ... % Turnout by Mail ... Alabama 5.5% ... Alaska [1] 14.3% ... American Samoa [2] 1.9% ... Arizona [3] 74.7% ... Arkansas 2.1% ... California 80.8% ... Colorado [4] 91.3% ... Connecticut 6.5% ... Delaware 6.5% ... District of Columbia 51.1% ... Florida [5] 26.8% ... Georgia [6] 5.1% ... Guam [7] 0.3% ... Hawaii 92.5% ... Idaho [8] 19.6% ... Illinois [9] 17.8% ... Indiana [10] 53.7% ... Iowa -- ... Kansas 11.0% ... Kentucky 5.6% ... Louisiana [11] 5.9% ... Maine [12] 25.5% ... Maryland 24.6% ... Massachusetts [13] 33.4% ... Michigan 35.4% ... Minnesota 13.7% ... Mississippi [14] -- ... Missouri 5.7% ... Montana [15] -- ... Nebraska [16] 31.8% ... Nevada 44.1% ... New Hampshire 11.2% ... New Jersey [17] 19.2% ... New Mexico 12.0% ... New York 10.0% ... North Carolina [18] 5.2% ... North Dakota 24.0% ... Northern Mariana Islands 7.3% ... Ohio 18.1% ... Oklahoma 6.3% ... Oregon [19] 99.3% ... Pennsylvania [20] 27.3% ... Puerto Rico [21] 10.3% ... Rhode Island 10.0% ... South Carolina 3.8% ... South Dakota 36.6% ... Tennessee 2.8% ... Texas 3.3% ... U.S. Virgin Islands 3.8% ... Utah 91.5% ... Vermont [22] 64.7% ... Virginia 10.5% ... Washington [23] 98.5% ... West Virginia 2.9% ... Wisconsin [24] 16.6% ... Wyoming 14.1% ... U.S. Total 30.3% ... % Turnout by Mail uses (F1d+F1g)/F1a x 100.

6. 2024 Presidential Election Voting and Registration Tables Now Available (CB25-TPS.29)

   U.S. Census Bureau, 2025-04-30 · supports

   “Voting methods also varied, with 39.6% of people voting in person on Election Day, 30.7% voting in person before Election Day, and 29.0% voting by mail. ... The Census Bureau has collected voting and registration data since 1964 and has fielded the Voting and Registration Supplement to the CPS every two years.”Hide quote

   Voting methods also varied, with 39.6% of people voting in person on Election Day, 30.7% voting in person before Election Day, and 29.0% voting by mail. ... The Census Bureau has collected voting and registration data since 1964 and has fielded the Voting and Registration Supplement to the CPS every two years.

7. Table 14. Method of Voting, By Selected Characteristics: November 2022 (CPS Voting and Registration Supplement)

   U.S. Census Bureau, 2023-04 · supports

   “Table 14. Method of Voting, By Selected Characteristics: November 2022 (Numbers in thousands) ... In-person on Election Day | In-person Before Election Day | By mail | Don't know or Refused ... Total 121916 49.5 18 31.8 0.7 ... Age 18 to 24 years 7372 54.7 14.6 29.1 1.5 ... 25 to 44 years 33798 53.6 15.3 30.3 0.8 ... 45 to 64 years 43661 52.7 18.8 27.8 0.8 ... 65 years and over 37086 41 20.3 38.3 0.4 ... Region Northeast 21812 72.1 7.2 20 0.7 ... Midwest 27183 66.1 12.9 20.6 0.4 ... South 43538 50.7 34.9 13.5 0.9 ... West 29383 15.7 5.8 77.9 0.7”Hide quote

   Table 14. Method of Voting, By Selected Characteristics: November 2022 (Numbers in thousands) ... In-person on Election Day | In-person Before Election Day | By mail | Don't know or Refused ... Total 121916 49.5 18 31.8 0.7 ... Age 18 to 24 years 7372 54.7 14.6 29.1 1.5 ... 25 to 44 years 33798 53.6 15.3 30.3 0.8 ... 45 to 64 years 43661 52.7 18.8 27.8 0.8 ... 65 years and over 37086 41 20.3 38.3 0.4 ... Region Northeast 21812 72.1 7.2 20 0.7 ... Midwest 27183 66.1 12.9 20.6 0.4 ... South 43538 50.7 34.9 13.5 0.9 ... West 29383 15.7 5.8 77.9 0.7

8. Table 14. Method of Voting, By Selected Characteristics: November 2020 (CPS Voting and Registration Supplement)

   U.S. Census Bureau, 2021-04 · supports

   “Table 14. Method of Voting, By Selected Characteristics: November 2020 (In thousands) ... In-person on Election Day | In-person Before Election Day | By mail | Don't know or Refused ... TOTAL 154628 30.4 26 43 0.7 ... Age 18 to 24 years 13752 35.1 24.1 39.9 0.9 ... 25 to 44 years 47512 34.2 25.7 39.5 0.7 ... 45 to 64 years 53646 31.8 28.6 38.9 0.6 ... 65 years and over 39718 22.2 23.6 53.6 0.6 ... Region Northeast 27353 45 12 42.6 0.5 ... Midwest 34210 42 19.9 37.6 0.6 ... South 57064 29.2 46.4 23.6 0.8 ... West 36001 10.1 10.2 79.1 0.7”Hide quote

   Table 14. Method of Voting, By Selected Characteristics: November 2020 (In thousands) ... In-person on Election Day | In-person Before Election Day | By mail | Don't know or Refused ... TOTAL 154628 30.4 26 43 0.7 ... Age 18 to 24 years 13752 35.1 24.1 39.9 0.9 ... 25 to 44 years 47512 34.2 25.7 39.5 0.7 ... 45 to 64 years 53646 31.8 28.6 38.9 0.6 ... 65 years and over 39718 22.2 23.6 53.6 0.6 ... Region Northeast 27353 45 12 42.6 0.5 ... Midwest 34210 42 19.9 37.6 0.6 ... South 57064 29.2 46.4 23.6 0.8 ... West 36001 10.1 10.2 79.1 0.7

9. Table 14. Method of Voting, By Selected Characteristics: November 2018 (CPS Voting and Registration Supplement)

   U.S. Census Bureau, 2019-04 · supports

   “Table 14. Method of Voting, By Selected Characteristics: November 2018 (In thousands) ... In-person on Election Day | In-person Before Election Day | By mail | Don't know or Refused ... TOTAL 122281 59.6 16.6 23.1 0.7 ... Age 18 to 24 years 8726 60.9 15.1 22.5 1.4 ... 25 to 44 years 34587 64.5 14.2 20.5 0.7 ... 45 to 64 years 45829 61.7 17.6 20.2 0.5 ... 65 years and over 33139 51.2 18.2 30 0.6 ... Region Northeast 21378 90.3 3.1 6.2 0.4 ... Midwest 27696 73.5 11.4 14.6 0.4 ... South 44723 56 33.3 9.7 0.9 ... West 28483 28.5 5.6 65.2 0.7”Hide quote

   Table 14. Method of Voting, By Selected Characteristics: November 2018 (In thousands) ... In-person on Election Day | In-person Before Election Day | By mail | Don't know or Refused ... TOTAL 122281 59.6 16.6 23.1 0.7 ... Age 18 to 24 years 8726 60.9 15.1 22.5 1.4 ... 25 to 44 years 34587 64.5 14.2 20.5 0.7 ... 45 to 64 years 45829 61.7 17.6 20.2 0.5 ... 65 years and over 33139 51.2 18.2 30 0.6 ... Region Northeast 21378 90.3 3.1 6.2 0.4 ... Midwest 27696 73.5 11.4 14.6 0.4 ... South 44723 56 33.3 9.7 0.9 ... West 28483 28.5 5.6 65.2 0.7

10. Early Voting and Mail Voting: Overview and Issues for Congress (IF11477)

    Congressional Research Service, 2026-07-10 · supports

    “According to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), as of June 2026, all states and the District of Columbia (DC) allowed at least some voters to receive their ballots by mail and 37 states and DC offered some form of no-excuse mail voting. ... Federal law requires all states to allow certain military and overseas voters to use mail voting in federal elections. ... Figure 1. Reported Methods of Voting, 2004-2024 ... Source: CRS, using data from the Voting and Registration Supplement to the U.S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey. Notes: Respondents were asked whether they voted in person or by mail and, if the former, whether on or before Election Day. Some respondents who received their ballots by mail and returned them in person may have reported voting in person. ... State laws authorizing some soldiers to vote away from home were enacted in the early 1800s, for example, but no-excuse mail voting was not introduced until the late 1970s. ... For example, Oregon began using all-mail elections for all races in 2000 but approved a test of the process for local elections in 1981 and used it for select elections through the 1990s.”Hide quote

    According to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), as of June 2026, all states and the District of Columbia (DC) allowed at least some voters to receive their ballots by mail and 37 states and DC offered some form of no-excuse mail voting. ... Federal law requires all states to allow certain military and overseas voters to use mail voting in federal elections. ... Figure 1. Reported Methods of Voting, 2004-2024 ... Source: CRS, using data from the Voting and Registration Supplement to the U.S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey. Notes: Respondents were asked whether they voted in person or by mail and, if the former, whether on or before Election Day. Some respondents who received their ballots by mail and returned them in person may have reported voting in person. ... State laws authorizing some soldiers to vote away from home were enacted in the early 1800s, for example, but no-excuse mail voting was not introduced until the late 1970s. ... For example, Oregon began using all-mail elections for all races in 2000 but approved a test of the process for local elections in 1981 and used it for select elections through the 1990s.

11. Table 18: States With Mostly Mail Elections (with Table 18a, year enacted and year implemented)

    National Conference of State Legislatures, 2026-08-07 · supports

    “Eight states and Washington, D.C., allow all elections to be conducted entirely by mail: California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Vermont and Washington state. ... California ... 2021 | 2022 | AB 37 ... Colorado ... 2013 | 2014 | HB 1303 ... District of Columbia ... 2022 | 2023 ... Hawaii ... 2019 | 2020 | HB 1248 ... Nevada ... 2021 | 2022 | AB 321 ... Oregon ... 1998 | 2000 | Citizen initiative ... Utah ... 2012 (Counties permitted to choose) | 2019 (The first year all counties opted for mostly mail elections) | HB 172 ... Vermont ... (General elections only.) | 2021 | 2022 | SB 15 ... Washington ... 2011 | 2012 | HB 5124”Hide quote

    Eight states and Washington, D.C., allow all elections to be conducted entirely by mail: California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Vermont and Washington state. ... California ... 2021 | 2022 | AB 37 ... Colorado ... 2013 | 2014 | HB 1303 ... District of Columbia ... 2022 | 2023 ... Hawaii ... 2019 | 2020 | HB 1248 ... Nevada ... 2021 | 2022 | AB 321 ... Oregon ... 1998 | 2000 | Citizen initiative ... Utah ... 2012 (Counties permitted to choose) | 2019 (The first year all counties opted for mostly mail elections) | HB 172 ... Vermont ... (General elections only.) | 2021 | 2022 | SB 15 ... Washington ... 2011 | 2012 | HB 5124

12. H.B. 300 Amendments to Election Law (Enrolled Copy), 2025 General Session

    Utah State Legislature, 2025 · complicates

    “for voting by mail: ... until 2029, permits a voter's identity to be verified using signature comparison, if the voter doesn't enter the digits described in the preceding paragraph; ... subject to certain exceptions, provides that, beginning in 2029, a voter will not receive a ballot by mail unless the voter requests to receive a ballot by mail; provides that a request to receive a ballot by mail remains in effect for eight years unless the voter takes certain action that results in termination of the request”Hide quote

    for voting by mail: ... until 2029, permits a voter's identity to be verified using signature comparison, if the voter doesn't enter the digits described in the preceding paragraph; ... subject to certain exceptions, provides that, beginning in 2029, a voter will not receive a ballot by mail unless the voter requests to receive a ballot by mail; provides that a request to receive a ballot by mail remains in effect for eight years unless the voter takes certain action that results in termination of the request

13. How We Voted in 2024 (Survey of the Performance of American Elections)

    MIT Election Data + Science Lab, 2025-07 · supports

    “Thirty-seven percent of Democrats reported voting by mail, compared to 24% of Republicans. ... In 2022, and then again in 2024, the gap closed somewhat, although this was primarily due to Democrats pulling back in the use of voting by mail rather than Republicans increasing their usage.”Hide quote

    Thirty-seven percent of Democrats reported voting by mail, compared to 24% of Republicans. ... In 2022, and then again in 2024, the gap closed somewhat, although this was primarily due to Democrats pulling back in the use of voting by mail rather than Republicans increasing their usage.

14. New Data: 17.7 Million Americans With Disabilities Voted in 2020, a Significant Increase Over 2016

    U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 2021-07-07 · supports

    “More than 53% of people with disabilities voted by mail, compared to 42% of people without disabilities. Just 26% of people with disabilities and 31% of people without disabilities voted at a polling place on Election Day. ... 5% of people with disabilities experienced difficulties voting by mail, compared to 18% of those who voted at a polling place.”Hide quote

    More than 53% of people with disabilities voted by mail, compared to 42% of people without disabilities. Just 26% of people with disabilities and 31% of people without disabilities voted at a polling place on Election Day. ... 5% of people with disabilities experienced difficulties voting by mail, compared to 18% of those who voted at a polling place.

15. Universal vote-by-mail has no impact on partisan turnout or vote share (PNAS 117(25):14052–14056)

    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (Thompson, Wu, Yoder and Hall), 2020-06-09 · supports

    “Looking across the columns, we see a stable estimate showing that VBM causes around a 2% increase (estimates range from 2.1 to 2.2%) in the share of the citizen voting-age population that turns out to vote.”Hide quote

    Looking across the columns, we see a stable estimate showing that VBM causes around a 2% increase (estimates range from 2.1 to 2.2%) in the share of the citizen voting-age population that turns out to vote.

16. Universal vote-by-mail has no impact on partisan turnout or vote share (PNAS 117(25):14052–14056)

    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (Thompson, Wu, Yoder and Hall), 2020-06-09 · supports

    “In this specification, we estimate that the Democratic turnout share increases by 0.7% as a result of VBM. ... The inclusion of these trends attenuates the estimates dramatically, to only 0.1%, while also shrinking the standard errors. In the latter two specifications, which are our most precise specifications, even the upper bound of the 95% CI is only about 0.3%, a very small effect.”Hide quote

    In this specification, we estimate that the Democratic turnout share increases by 0.7% as a result of VBM. ... The inclusion of these trends attenuates the estimates dramatically, to only 0.1%, while also shrinking the standard errors. In the latter two specifications, which are our most precise specifications, even the upper bound of the 95% CI is only about 0.3%, a very small effect.

17. Universal vote-by-mail has no impact on partisan turnout or vote share (PNAS 117(25):14052–14056)

    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (Thompson, Wu, Yoder and Hall), 2020-06-09 · supports

    “While the standard errors on these estimates are larger than the standard errors on the turnout share estimates, they continue to suggest modest or null effects, and they are nowhere near the magnitude necessary to represent a major, permanent electoral shift toward the Democratic party.”Hide quote

    While the standard errors on these estimates are larger than the standard errors on the turnout share estimates, they continue to suggest modest or null effects, and they are nowhere near the magnitude necessary to represent a major, permanent electoral shift toward the Democratic party.

18. How Did Absentee Voting Affect the 2020 U.S. Election? (Yoder, Handan-Nader, Myers, Nowacki, Thompson, Wu, Yorgason and Hall)

    Stanford Democracy and Polarization Lab (working paper), 2021-06-25 · supports

    “Focusing on natural experiments in Texas and Indiana, we find that 65-year-olds turned out at nearly the same rate as 64-year-olds, despite the fact that only 65-year-olds could vote absentee without an excuse. Being just old enough to vote no-excuse absentee did not substantially increase Democratic turnout relative to Republican turnout. ... In the first column, we see that the estimated increase in turnout for 65-year-olds, who are eligible to vote absentee without an excuse in Texas, is 0.02 percentage points—i.e., 2 basis points. The upper bound of the 95% confidence interval (with robust standard errors) for this effect is 0.26 percentage points.”Hide quote

    Focusing on natural experiments in Texas and Indiana, we find that 65-year-olds turned out at nearly the same rate as 64-year-olds, despite the fact that only 65-year-olds could vote absentee without an excuse. Being just old enough to vote no-excuse absentee did not substantially increase Democratic turnout relative to Republican turnout. ... In the first column, we see that the estimated increase in turnout for 65-year-olds, who are eligible to vote absentee without an excuse in Texas, is 0.02 percentage points—i.e., 2 basis points. The upper bound of the 95% confidence interval (with robust standard errors) for this effect is 0.26 percentage points.

19. How Did Absentee Voting Affect the 2020 U.S. Election? (Yoder, Handan-Nader, Myers, Nowacki, Thompson, Wu, Yorgason and Hall)

    Stanford Democracy and Polarization Lab (working paper), 2021-06-25 · complicates

    “While rates of absentee voting increased by approximately 9.5 percentage points in Texas and 5.3 percentage points in Indiana, rates of early in person voting decreased by roughly 8.8 percentage points in Texas and 3.4 percentage points in Indiana”Hide quote

    While rates of absentee voting increased by approximately 9.5 percentage points in Texas and 5.3 percentage points in Indiana, rates of early in person voting decreased by roughly 8.8 percentage points in Texas and 3.4 percentage points in Indiana

20. Majority of Americans Continue to Back Expanded Early Voting, Voting by Mail, Voter ID

    Pew Research Center, 2025-08-22 · supports

    “In April 2020, during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, 70% of Americans favored allowing any voter who wanted to cast a ballot via mail to do so. This included nearly half of Republicans (49%) and nearly nine-in-ten Democrats (87%). ... Now, 58% of Americans support allowing voters to cast ballots by mail, including 32% of Republicans and 83% of Democrats. ... According to Pew Research Center’s study of validated voters, voters in the 2024 presidential election were roughly equally likely to have voted in person on Election Day (34%), early in person (32%) or by mail (34%). ... In states with universal mail-in voting – like California, Colorado and Nevada, where ballots are mailed to all voters before the election – 73% favor allowing any voter to vote by mail, including 91% of Democrats and 46% of Republicans. ... In states where voters can request an absentee ballot for any reason, but ballots aren’t automatically sent to them – like Florida, New York and Pennsylvania – 58% favor allowing any voter to cast a ballot by mail. ... In these states, 45% favor allowing anyone to vote by mail, including 22% of Republicans and 71% of Democrats.”Hide quote

    In April 2020, during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, 70% of Americans favored allowing any voter who wanted to cast a ballot via mail to do so. This included nearly half of Republicans (49%) and nearly nine-in-ten Democrats (87%). ... Now, 58% of Americans support allowing voters to cast ballots by mail, including 32% of Republicans and 83% of Democrats. ... According to Pew Research Center’s study of validated voters, voters in the 2024 presidential election were roughly equally likely to have voted in person on Election Day (34%), early in person (32%) or by mail (34%). ... In states with universal mail-in voting – like California, Colorado and Nevada, where ballots are mailed to all voters before the election – 73% favor allowing any voter to vote by mail, including 91% of Democrats and 46% of Republicans. ... In states where voters can request an absentee ballot for any reason, but ballots aren’t automatically sent to them – like Florida, New York and Pennsylvania – 58% favor allowing any voter to cast a ballot by mail. ... In these states, 45% favor allowing anyone to vote by mail, including 22% of Republicans and 71% of Democrats.

21. Bipartisan Support for Early In-Person Voting, Voter ID, Election Day National Holiday

    Pew Research Center, 2024-02-07 · supports

    “The Pew Research Center survey, conducted Jan. 16-21 among 5,140 adults, also finds smaller majorities supporting allowing anyone to vote by mail if they want to (57%) ... Today, just 28% of Republicans say any voter should be allowed to vote by mail if they want to. Four years ago, 49% of Republicans said this. An overwhelming share of Democrats (84%) continue to say voting by mail should be available to all voters.”Hide quote

    The Pew Research Center survey, conducted Jan. 16-21 among 5,140 adults, also finds smaller majorities supporting allowing anyone to vote by mail if they want to (57%) ... Today, just 28% of Republicans say any voter should be allowed to vote by mail if they want to. Four years ago, 49% of Republicans said this. An overwhelming share of Democrats (84%) continue to say voting by mail should be available to all voters.

22. Confidence in Election Integrity Hides Deep Partisan Divide

    Gallup, 2022-11-04 · supports

    “More than half of Americans have consistently expressed confidence in the accuracy of elections throughout Gallup's trend since 2004, but confidence was highest leading up to the 2004 presidential and 2006 midterm elections. ... In most election years since 2004, Gallup has found that Americans who self-identify with the political party of the incumbent president have expressed greater confidence in election accuracy -- with two exceptions, 2008 and 2020. In October 2008, during the global economic crisis, Republicans' and Democrats' confidence in the accuracy of that year's presidential election each fell to 57% ... In 2020, amid then-President Donald Trump's public questioning of the validity of mail voting in the upcoming election, Republicans' confidence in voting integrity dropped to a new low of 44%, while Democrats' confidence remained high, slightly higher (76%) than in the previous election year. The current 45 percentage points that separate Republicans' (40%) and Democrats' (85%) confidence represents the largest gap Gallup has recorded on this measure since 2004.”Hide quote

    More than half of Americans have consistently expressed confidence in the accuracy of elections throughout Gallup's trend since 2004, but confidence was highest leading up to the 2004 presidential and 2006 midterm elections. ... In most election years since 2004, Gallup has found that Americans who self-identify with the political party of the incumbent president have expressed greater confidence in election accuracy -- with two exceptions, 2008 and 2020. In October 2008, during the global economic crisis, Republicans' and Democrats' confidence in the accuracy of that year's presidential election each fell to 57% ... In 2020, amid then-President Donald Trump's public questioning of the validity of mail voting in the upcoming election, Republicans' confidence in voting integrity dropped to a new low of 44%, while Democrats' confidence remained high, slightly higher (76%) than in the previous election year. The current 45 percentage points that separate Republicans' (40%) and Democrats' (85%) confidence represents the largest gap Gallup has recorded on this measure since 2004.

23. Table 14. Method of Voting, By Selected Characteristics: November 2024 (CPS Voting and Registration Supplement)

    U.S. Census Bureau, 2025-04-30 · supports

    “Table 14. Method of Voting, By Selected Characteristics: November 2024 (Numbers in thousands, Population 18 and Over) ... In-person on Election Day | In-person Before Election Day | By mail | Don't know or Refused ... Total 154308 39.6 30.7 29 0.7 ... Age 18 to 24 years 13150 43.9 28.2 26.3 1.5 ... 25 to 44 years 46488 45.2 27.6 26.4 0.8 ... 45 to 64 years 51354 41.3 32.8 25.4 0.5 ... 65 years and over 43317 30.2 32.4 36.8 0.6 ... Region Northeast 27119 58.8 19.3 21.3 0.5 ... Midwest 34554 52.5 28.8 18 0.7 ... South 57059 37.3 50.5 11.4 0.8 ... West 35575 16.1 9.6 73.5 0.8”Hide quote

    Table 14. Method of Voting, By Selected Characteristics: November 2024 (Numbers in thousands, Population 18 and Over) ... In-person on Election Day | In-person Before Election Day | By mail | Don't know or Refused ... Total 154308 39.6 30.7 29 0.7 ... Age 18 to 24 years 13150 43.9 28.2 26.3 1.5 ... 25 to 44 years 46488 45.2 27.6 26.4 0.8 ... 45 to 64 years 51354 41.3 32.8 25.4 0.5 ... 65 years and over 43317 30.2 32.4 36.8 0.6 ... Region Northeast 27119 58.8 19.3 21.3 0.5 ... Midwest 34554 52.5 28.8 18 0.7 ... South 57059 37.3 50.5 11.4 0.8 ... West 35575 16.1 9.6 73.5 0.8

24. Election Administration and Voting Survey 2020 Comprehensive Report, Figure 3

    U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 2021-08 · supports

    “Source: Election Day turnout was calculated as F1b/F1a x 100 for all years. Mail turnout was calculated as (F1d+F1g)/F1a x 100 for all years. In-person early turnout was calculated as F1f/F1a x 100 for all years. ... Casewise deletion was used at the state level (percentages for each mode of voting were calculated independently, and only states that reported data for a given mode were included in the analysis), and because of this, percentages do not sum to 100%.”Hide quote

    Source: Election Day turnout was calculated as F1b/F1a x 100 for all years. Mail turnout was calculated as (F1d+F1g)/F1a x 100 for all years. In-person early turnout was calculated as F1f/F1a x 100 for all years. ... Casewise deletion was used at the state level (percentages for each mode of voting were calculated independently, and only states that reported data for a given mode were included in the analysis), and because of this, percentages do not sum to 100%.

25. Evolution of Absentee/Mail Voting Laws 2016–2026, Table 1 (columns: no-excuse absentee or all-mail elections | excuse required | COVID-19 excuse added for 2020 election)

    National Conference of State Legislatures, 2026-08-26 · supports

    “November 2016 30 states and D.C. 20 states ... January 2020 32 states and D.C. 18 states ... November 2020 38 states and D.C. 2 states 10 states ... November 2022 35 states and D.C. 15 states ... November 2024 36 states and D.C. 14 states ... November 2026 (expected) 37 states and D.C. 13 states”Hide quote

    November 2016 30 states and D.C. 20 states ... January 2020 32 states and D.C. 18 states ... November 2020 38 states and D.C. 2 states 10 states ... November 2022 35 states and D.C. 15 states ... November 2024 36 states and D.C. 14 states ... November 2026 (expected) 37 states and D.C. 13 states

26. American Trends Panel Wave 176, August 2025: Final Topline

    Pew Research Center, 2025-08-22 · supports

    “Note: This survey was conducted primarily online, with some interviews conducted by live telephone. ... American Trends Panel surveys conducted between October 2016 and June 2024 were conducted fully online ... ML Allowing any voter to vote by mail if they want to Aug 4-10, 2025 34 24 18 24 1 Jan 16-21, 2024 35 23 15 26 1 Apr 7-12, 2020 44 26 13 16 1”Hide quote

    Note: This survey was conducted primarily online, with some interviews conducted by live telephone. ... American Trends Panel surveys conducted between October 2016 and June 2024 were conducted fully online ... ML Allowing any voter to vote by mail if they want to Aug 4-10, 2025 34 24 18 24 1 Jan 16-21, 2024 35 23 15 26 1 Apr 7-12, 2020 44 26 13 16 1

Absentee and Mail Ballot Fraud and Manipulation of the Count in the US, 1936–2026

1. Order in the Matter of Investigation of Election Irregularities Affecting Counties Within the 9th Congressional District

   North Carolina State Board of Elections, 2019-03-13 · supports

   “After the 2018 General Election, districtwide, the apparent results of CD-9 were as follows: Harris 139,246, McCready 138,341, and Scott 5,130. Accordingly, Harris led by a margin of 905 votes, or 0.3% of the total number of votes tallied. … Dowless hired workers he paid in cash to collect absentee request forms, to collect absentee ballots, and to falsify absentee ballot witness certifications. … such as falsely witnessing ballots, filling out ballots, and tracing over signatures of witnesses to match the ink color of the voter. … the 2018 General Election for North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District was corrupted by fraud, improprieties, and irregularities so pervasive that its results are tainted as the fruit of an operation manifestly unfair to the voters and corrosive to our system of representative government.”Hide quote

   After the 2018 General Election, districtwide, the apparent results of CD-9 were as follows: Harris 139,246, McCready 138,341, and Scott 5,130. Accordingly, Harris led by a margin of 905 votes, or 0.3% of the total number of votes tallied. … Dowless hired workers he paid in cash to collect absentee request forms, to collect absentee ballots, and to falsify absentee ballot witness certifications. … such as falsely witnessing ballots, filling out ballots, and tracing over signatures of witnesses to match the ink color of the voter. … the 2018 General Election for North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District was corrupted by fraud, improprieties, and irregularities so pervasive that its results are tainted as the fruit of an operation manifestly unfair to the voters and corrosive to our system of representative government.

2. With two guilty pleas, NC9 election fraud saga comes to an end

   WSOC-TV, 2025-03-21 · supports

   “Wake County District Attorney Lorrin Freeman confirmed Lisa Britt and Woody Hester both pleaded guilty to charges stemming from the investigation. … Dowless died before facing a judge. All other workers pleaded guilty.”Hide quote

   Wake County District Attorney Lorrin Freeman confirmed Lisa Britt and Woody Hester both pleaded guilty to charges stemming from the investigation. … Dowless died before facing a judge. All other workers pleaded guilty.

3. Pabey v. Pastrick, 816 N.E.2d 1138 (Ind. 2004)

   Supreme Court of Indiana (via Caselaw Access Project), 2004-08-06 · supports

   “Of the 8,227 votes personally cast on election day, Pabey received 199 more votes than Pastrick. But of the 1,950 absentee ballots, Pastrick defeated Pabey by 477 votes, producing a 278-vote final vieto-ry for Pastrick. The trial court concluded that Pabey had proven "that a deliberate series of actions occurred" that "perverted the absentee voting process and compromised the integrity and results of that election." … The trial court declared 155 votes to be invalid … The extensive evidence presented established that, at the least thirty-nine separate individuals ... fell within the ambit of those activities that engaged cash incentives to encourage absentee voting … Our conclusion is not altered whether the number of invalidated absentee ballots is 155 as found by the trial court, or 100, as urged by the Lake County Election Board. Conclusion We reverse the trial court's determination denying a special election and remand to the trial court with directions to promptly order a special election”Hide quote

   Of the 8,227 votes personally cast on election day, Pabey received 199 more votes than Pastrick. But of the 1,950 absentee ballots, Pastrick defeated Pabey by 477 votes, producing a 278-vote final vieto-ry for Pastrick. The trial court concluded that Pabey had proven "that a deliberate series of actions occurred" that "perverted the absentee voting process and compromised the integrity and results of that election." … The trial court declared 155 votes to be invalid … The extensive evidence presented established that, at the least thirty-nine separate individuals ... fell within the ambit of those activities that engaged cash incentives to encourage absentee voting … Our conclusion is not altered whether the number of invalidated absentee ballots is 155 as found by the trial court, or 100, as urged by the Lake County Election Board. Conclusion We reverse the trial court's determination denying a special election and remand to the trial court with directions to promptly order a special election

4. Do absentee ballots facilitate fraud?

   NBC News, 2008-10-16 · supports

   “Forty-seven people either pleaded guilty or were convicted of various crimes as a result of the investigation.”Hide quote

   Forty-seven people either pleaded guilty or were convicted of various crimes as a result of the investigation.

5. Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181 (2008), lead opinion

   Supreme Court of the United States (via Caselaw Access Project), 2008-04-28 · supports

   “The only kind of voter fraud that SEA 483 addresses is in-person voter impersonation at polling places. The record contains no evidence of any such fraud actually occurring in Indiana at any time in its history. … It remains true, however, that flagrant examples of such fraud in other parts of the country have been documented throughout this Nation’s history by respected historians and journalists, that occasional examples have surfaced in recent years, and that Indiana’s own experience with fraudulent voting in the 2003 Democratic primary for East Chicago Mayor — though perpetrated using absentee ballots and not in-person fraud — demonstrate that not only is the risk of voter fraud real but that it could affect the outcome of a close election.”Hide quote

   The only kind of voter fraud that SEA 483 addresses is in-person voter impersonation at polling places. The record contains no evidence of any such fraud actually occurring in Indiana at any time in its history. … It remains true, however, that flagrant examples of such fraud in other parts of the country have been documented throughout this Nation’s history by respected historians and journalists, that occasional examples have surfaced in recent years, and that Indiana’s own experience with fraudulent voting in the 2003 Democratic primary for East Chicago Mayor — though perpetrated using absentee ballots and not in-person fraud — demonstrate that not only is the risk of voter fraud real but that it could affect the outcome of a close election.

6. After voter fraud allegations, judge orders new election in Paterson

   New Jersey Globe, 2020-08-19 · supports

   “Judge Ernest Caposela today ordered a new election in a Paterson city council election that led to criminal charges against the winner and others. … Mendez is accused of fraud in casting mail-in votes, unauthorized possession of ballots, tampering with public records, and falsifying or tampering with records.”Hide quote

   Judge Ernest Caposela today ordered a new election in a Paterson city council election that led to criminal charges against the winner and others. … Mendez is accused of fraud in casting mail-in votes, unauthorized possession of ballots, tampering with public records, and falsifying or tampering with records.

7. Voter fraud charges against Paterson councilman dropped after six years

   New Jersey Globe, 2026-04-13 · complicates

   “Superior Court Judge Sohail Mohammed dismissed the case on speedy trial grounds and the state prosecutors’ failure to disclose an immunity agreement that had been reached with a key witness, according to the Paterson Press. … when the U.S. Postal Inspection Service found hundreds of mail-in ballots bound together in a series of mail deposit boxes.”Hide quote

   Superior Court Judge Sohail Mohammed dismissed the case on speedy trial grounds and the state prosecutors’ failure to disclose an immunity agreement that had been reached with a key witness, according to the Paterson Press. … when the U.S. Postal Inspection Service found hundreds of mail-in ballots bound together in a series of mail deposit boxes.

8. Prosecutors will drop criminal charges against Paterson’s Michael Jackson

   New Jersey Globe, 2026-05-15 · complicates

   “While vacating the charges against Jackson, Davenport is taking a different approach with Mendez. Her office moved yesterday to appeal the dismissal of his indictment by a Superior Court judge last month.”Hide quote

   While vacating the charges against Jackson, Davenport is taking a different approach with Mendez. Her office moved yesterday to appeal the dismissal of his indictment by a Superior Court judge last month.

9. Judge orders new Bridgeport primary

   CT Mirror, 2023-11-01 · supports

   “"Given the volume of votes at issue, the miscounting of those statutorily invalid votes leaves this court unable to determine the result of the primary." ... Bloss based his argument that a new primary is needed on numbers — arguing that as many as 1,253 were submitted through drop boxes, while 2,100 hours of surveillance videos of the city's four drop boxes show only about 420 people placing ballots in them. … Ganim defeated Gomes by 251 votes in the Sept.”Hide quote

   "Given the volume of votes at issue, the miscounting of those statutorily invalid votes leaves this court unable to determine the result of the primary." ... Bloss based his argument that a new primary is needed on numbers — arguing that as many as 1,253 were submitted through drop boxes, while 2,100 hours of surveillance videos of the city's four drop boxes show only about 420 people placing ballots in them. … Ganim defeated Gomes by 251 votes in the Sept.

10. Election Fraud Map data file (vfdb.csv), archived 27 July 2026

    The Heritage Foundation, 2026-07-27 · supports

    “A 1993 special Pennsylvania state senate election was overturned by a federal district court judge due to absentee ballot fraud. … After a surprising and extraordinary surge in absentee ballots seemed to result in a victory for Stinson, an investigation was undertaken. Stinson was indicted for his role in the scheme but was not convicted. Two campaign workers, Ramon Pratt and Barbara Landers, were convicted of misdemeanor offenses. … Two Democratic city commissioners, Margaret Tartaglione and Alexander Talmadge, Jr., and an elections supervisor, Dennis Kelly, were also found to have been complicit in allowing the fraud to occur. … County Clerk Donald Whitten pleaded guilty to stuffing ballot boxes with fraudulent ballots and falsifying absentee ballots in an effort to rig the 2010 Democratic primary. He won the election, but a judge overturned the election after throwing out 300 fraudulent ballots. Whitten was sentenced to 18 months in prison and three years of supervised release, with a $5,000 fine. … Sheriff Jerry Bowman pleaded guilty to stuffing ballot boxes with fraudulent ballots and falsifying absentee ballots in an effort to rig the 2010 Democratic primary. … Officials became suspicious when 61% of the vote-by-mail ballots were cast for the Republican candidate, despite the fact that only 16% of the mail-by-ballot were registered Republicans. … Nicholas Holliday was declared the winner of the June primary by a margin of 37 votes over Robert Devaull. After Devaull filed a lawsuit challenging the results of the race, the Monroe County District court found that 66 of the 84 absentee ballots cast should not have been counted because they were not valid. A notary, Dallas Jones, was arrested for election fraud for notarizing ballots without watching voters sign ballots or checking their identification. … The results of the 2023 Caddo Parish Sheriff Runoff Election, which was decided by one vote, were overturned by a judge due to at least 11 illegal votes that were cast. … The court found that 2 individuals voted twice in the election, by mail and again in person. Four individuals voted who were under court interdiction (declared mentally incompetent) and thus ineligible to vote. Five individuals submitted absentee ballots that did not have proper signatures or comply with witness requirements under Louisiana law. … The fraud took place during Rivera's 2013 re-election bid, which he won by a scant 16 votes. His challenger sued alleging fraud, and a judge determined that 30 ballots had been illegally cast, enough to alter the outcome of the election. … Fernando Gonzalez won a seat on the Perth Amboy City Council by 10 votes in an election where at least 13 illegal absentee ballots were cast. … had won by three votes. … the judge threw out eight absentee ballots that had case for Gill … The margin of victory was only 449 votes in an election in which over one million votes were cast. … In total, the court ruled that 1,482 illegal votes were cast in the election … A City Council election (originally decided by four votes) in Vernon, California is overturned when it is determined that five people who voted for the winner were not residents of the city, and two others had not properly mailed in their ballots. … The 2018 election for Georgia's 28th House district was overturned twice by Senior Superior Court Judge David Sweat because some out-of-district voters submitted ballots, some voters moved out of the district between the first and second runoff elections, and there was at least one instance of duplicate voting. … Superior Court Judge Judith Chirlin overturned the election, returning Bradley to power based on the fact that the city clerk had improperly placed Perrodin's name at the top of the ballot rather than select the order randomly. … Donald L. Woodward was charged by Asotin County with one felony count of perjury after he filled out and signed his deceased wife's mail-in ballot for the 2016 general election. Election officials detected the forgery because the signature did not match the signature for her that was on file”Hide quote

    A 1993 special Pennsylvania state senate election was overturned by a federal district court judge due to absentee ballot fraud. … After a surprising and extraordinary surge in absentee ballots seemed to result in a victory for Stinson, an investigation was undertaken. Stinson was indicted for his role in the scheme but was not convicted. Two campaign workers, Ramon Pratt and Barbara Landers, were convicted of misdemeanor offenses. … Two Democratic city commissioners, Margaret Tartaglione and Alexander Talmadge, Jr., and an elections supervisor, Dennis Kelly, were also found to have been complicit in allowing the fraud to occur. … County Clerk Donald Whitten pleaded guilty to stuffing ballot boxes with fraudulent ballots and falsifying absentee ballots in an effort to rig the 2010 Democratic primary. He won the election, but a judge overturned the election after throwing out 300 fraudulent ballots. Whitten was sentenced to 18 months in prison and three years of supervised release, with a $5,000 fine. … Sheriff Jerry Bowman pleaded guilty to stuffing ballot boxes with fraudulent ballots and falsifying absentee ballots in an effort to rig the 2010 Democratic primary. … Officials became suspicious when 61% of the vote-by-mail ballots were cast for the Republican candidate, despite the fact that only 16% of the mail-by-ballot were registered Republicans. … Nicholas Holliday was declared the winner of the June primary by a margin of 37 votes over Robert Devaull. After Devaull filed a lawsuit challenging the results of the race, the Monroe County District court found that 66 of the 84 absentee ballots cast should not have been counted because they were not valid. A notary, Dallas Jones, was arrested for election fraud for notarizing ballots without watching voters sign ballots or checking their identification. … The results of the 2023 Caddo Parish Sheriff Runoff Election, which was decided by one vote, were overturned by a judge due to at least 11 illegal votes that were cast. … The court found that 2 individuals voted twice in the election, by mail and again in person. Four individuals voted who were under court interdiction (declared mentally incompetent) and thus ineligible to vote. Five individuals submitted absentee ballots that did not have proper signatures or comply with witness requirements under Louisiana law. … The fraud took place during Rivera's 2013 re-election bid, which he won by a scant 16 votes. His challenger sued alleging fraud, and a judge determined that 30 ballots had been illegally cast, enough to alter the outcome of the election. … Fernando Gonzalez won a seat on the Perth Amboy City Council by 10 votes in an election where at least 13 illegal absentee ballots were cast. … had won by three votes. … the judge threw out eight absentee ballots that had case for Gill … The margin of victory was only 449 votes in an election in which over one million votes were cast. … In total, the court ruled that 1,482 illegal votes were cast in the election … A City Council election (originally decided by four votes) in Vernon, California is overturned when it is determined that five people who voted for the winner were not residents of the city, and two others had not properly mailed in their ballots. … The 2018 election for Georgia's 28th House district was overturned twice by Senior Superior Court Judge David Sweat because some out-of-district voters submitted ballots, some voters moved out of the district between the first and second runoff elections, and there was at least one instance of duplicate voting. … Superior Court Judge Judith Chirlin overturned the election, returning Bradley to power based on the fact that the city clerk had improperly placed Perrodin's name at the top of the ballot rather than select the order randomly. … Donald L. Woodward was charged by Asotin County with one felony count of perjury after he filled out and signed his deceased wife's mail-in ballot for the 2016 general election. Election officials detected the forgery because the signature did not match the signature for her that was on file

11. Election Fraud Map: A Sampling of Proven Instances of Election Fraud

    The Heritage Foundation, 2025-12-12 · complicates

    “The Election Fraud Map displays a sampling of proven instances of election fraud. Every case ended in a finding that the individual engaged in wrongdoing in an election hoping to affect its outcome—or that the results were sufficiently in question to be overturned. While not comprehensive, this map demonstrates vulnerabilities in the election process and the ways in which fraud is committed.”Hide quote

    The Election Fraud Map displays a sampling of proven instances of election fraud. Every case ended in a finding that the individual engaged in wrongdoing in an election hoping to affect its outcome—or that the results were sufficiently in question to be overturned. While not comprehensive, this map demonstrates vulnerabilities in the election process and the ways in which fraud is committed.

12. Comprehensive Database of U.S. Voter Fraud Uncovers No Evidence That Photo ID Is Needed

    News21, 2012-08-12 · supports

    “A News21 analysis of 2,068 alleged election-fraud cases since 2000 shows that while fraud has occurred, the rate is infinitesimal, and in-person voter impersonation on Election Day, which prompted 37 state legislatures to enact or consider tough voter ID laws, is virtually non-existent. … Analysis of the resulting comprehensive News21 election fraud database turned up 10 cases of voter impersonation. … There is more fraud in absentee ballots and voter registration than any other categories. The analysis shows 491 cases of absentee ballot fraud and 400 cases of registration fraud. A required photo ID at the polls would not have prevented these cases. … Of reported election-fraud allegations in the database whose resolution could be determined, 46 percent resulted in acquittals, dropped charges or decisions not to bring charges.”Hide quote

    A News21 analysis of 2,068 alleged election-fraud cases since 2000 shows that while fraud has occurred, the rate is infinitesimal, and in-person voter impersonation on Election Day, which prompted 37 state legislatures to enact or consider tough voter ID laws, is virtually non-existent. … Analysis of the resulting comprehensive News21 election fraud database turned up 10 cases of voter impersonation. … There is more fraud in absentee ballots and voter registration than any other categories. The analysis shows 491 cases of absentee ballot fraud and 400 cases of registration fraud. A required photo ID at the polls would not have prevented these cases. … Of reported election-fraud allegations in the database whose resolution could be determined, 46 percent resulted in acquittals, dropped charges or decisions not to bring charges.

13. Building Confidence in U.S. Elections

    Commission on Federal Election Reform (Carter–Baker), 2005-09 · supports

    “There is no evidence of extensive fraud in U.S. elections or of multiple voting, but both occur, and it could affect the outcome of a close election. … While there is little evidence of fraud in Oregon, where the entire state votes by mail, absentee balloting in other states has been one of the major sources of fraud. Even in Oregon, better precautions are needed to ensure that the return of ballots is not intercepted. … Fraud occurs in several ways. Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud. A notorious recent case of absentee ballot fraud was Miami’s mayoral election of 1998, and in that case, the judge declared the election fraudulent and called for a new election. … Citizens who vote at home, at nursing homes, at the workplace, or in church are more susceptible to pressure, overt and subtle, or to intimidation. Vote buying schemes are far more difficult to detect when citizens vote by mail. … 5.2.1 State and local jurisdictions should prohibit a person from handling absentee ballots other than the voter, an acknowledged family member, the U.S. Postal Service or other legitimate shipper, or election officials. The practice in some states of allowing candidates or party workers to pick up and deliver absentee ballots should be eliminated.”Hide quote

    There is no evidence of extensive fraud in U.S. elections or of multiple voting, but both occur, and it could affect the outcome of a close election. … While there is little evidence of fraud in Oregon, where the entire state votes by mail, absentee balloting in other states has been one of the major sources of fraud. Even in Oregon, better precautions are needed to ensure that the return of ballots is not intercepted. … Fraud occurs in several ways. Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud. A notorious recent case of absentee ballot fraud was Miami’s mayoral election of 1998, and in that case, the judge declared the election fraudulent and called for a new election. … Citizens who vote at home, at nursing homes, at the workplace, or in church are more susceptible to pressure, overt and subtle, or to intimidation. Vote buying schemes are far more difficult to detect when citizens vote by mail. … 5.2.1 State and local jurisdictions should prohibit a person from handling absentee ballots other than the voter, an acknowledged family member, the U.S. Postal Service or other legitimate shipper, or election officials. The practice in some states of allowing candidates or party workers to pick up and deliver absentee ballots should be eliminated.

14. Election Administration and Voting Survey 2024 Comprehensive Report

    U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 2025-06-30 · supports

    “Of the mail ballots that were returned by voters, 47,629,437 were reported as being counted and 584,463 were reported as being rejected, for a count rate of 98.8% of the mail ballots that were returned and a rejection rate of 1.2% of the mail ballots that were returned.”Hide quote

    Of the mail ballots that were returned by voters, 47,629,437 were reported as being counted and 584,463 were reported as being rejected, for a count rate of 98.8% of the mail ballots that were returned and a rejection rate of 1.2% of the mail ballots that were returned.

15. 3rd Strike Against Voter Fraud Claims Means They're Out After Signature Audit Finds No Fraud

    Georgia Secretary of State, 2020-12-29 · complicates

    “A signature match audit in Cobb County found "no fraudulent absentee ballots" and found that the Cobb County Elections Department had "a 99.99% accuracy rate in performing correct signature verification procedures." ... The audit found that only two ballots should have been identified by Cobb County Elections Officials for cure notification that weren't. In one case, the ballot was "mistakenly signed by the elector's spouse," and in the other, the voter "reported signing the front of the envelope only." In both cases, the identified voters filled out the ballots themselves.”Hide quote

    A signature match audit in Cobb County found "no fraudulent absentee ballots" and found that the Cobb County Elections Department had "a 99.99% accuracy rate in performing correct signature verification procedures." ... The audit found that only two ballots should have been identified by Cobb County Elections Officials for cure notification that weren't. In one case, the ballot was "mistakenly signed by the elector's spouse," and in the other, the voter "reported signing the front of the envelope only." In both cases, the identified voters filled out the ballots themselves.

16. Securing the ballot: Report of Sir Eric Pickles' review into electoral fraud

    UK Government (Cabinet Office), 2016-08 · complicates

    “The ability to prove undue influence within households is hampered by the reluctance of individuals to report it. Evidence to the review maintained the reasons were considered similar to those which prevent sufferers of domestic abuse from coming forward.”Hide quote

    The ability to prove undue influence within households is hampered by the reluctance of individuals to report it. Evidence to the review maintained the reasons were considered similar to those which prevent sufferers of domestic abuse from coming forward.

17. A 'Modern' Democracy That Can't Count Votes

    Los Angeles Times, 2000-12-11 · complicates

    “In a pilot study, Rose gathered preliminary survey data this year on voters in Washington County, outside Portland. About 5% of 818 respondents said other people marked their ballots, and 2.4% said other people signed their ballot envelopes. Rose suspects the real number is higher, because people are reluctant to admit being party to a crime.”Hide quote

    In a pilot study, Rose gathered preliminary survey data this year on voters in Washington County, outside Portland. About 5% of 818 respondents said other people marked their ballots, and 2.4% said other people signed their ballot envelopes. Rose suspects the real number is higher, because people are reluctant to admit being party to a crime.

18. Report to Congress on the Activities and Operations of the Public Integrity Section for 1984

    US Department of Justice, Public Integrity Section, 1985-04 · supports

    “Illinois, N.D. - In an investigation in the City of Chicago, fifty-eight individuals, including city employees and election judges, thus far have been convicted of vote fraud in the November 1982, general election. The investigation continues. … Texas, S.D. - A total of twenty-nine persons were indicted, and twenty-one persons convicted, of buying votes with food stamps and welfare benefits in Duval County, Texas. This series of cases focused on the 1982 Texas primary election, and was investigated jointly by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Texas Rangers.”Hide quote

    Illinois, N.D. - In an investigation in the City of Chicago, fifty-eight individuals, including city employees and election judges, thus far have been convicted of vote fraud in the November 1982, general election. The investigation continues. … Texas, S.D. - A total of twenty-nine persons were indicted, and twenty-one persons convicted, of buying votes with food stamps and welfare benefits in Duval County, Texas. This series of cases focused on the 1982 Texas primary election, and was investigated jointly by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Texas Rangers.

19. An Interview with Dan Webb (IST-A-L-2016-034), abstract

    Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library, 2016-12 · supports

    “The FBI conducted an extensive investigation, and a grand jury issued a report detailing the scope and breadth of the vote fraud. Webb’s office cooperated with the FBI during its investigation and prosecuted sixty five individuals for federal election crimes; sixty-three of those were convicted.”Hide quote

    The FBI conducted an extensive investigation, and a grand jury issued a report detailing the scope and breadth of the vote fraud. Webb’s office cooperated with the FBI during its investigation and prosecuted sixty five individuals for federal election crimes; sixty-three of those were convicted.

20. United States v. Olinger, 759 F.2d 1293 (7th Cir. 1985)

    US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (via Caselaw Access Project), 1985-04-15 · supports

    “On the day of the general election, Hicks distributed ballot applications, along with the names of registered voters who had moved away or died, to the election judges, including the appellant. The election judges completed the ballot applications with the names of the phantom voters. Then, using the fraudulent ballot applications, the election judges cast votes according to Hicks’ instructions. … Appellant watched as Hicks solicited voters and paid them $2.00 per vote. As a result of these activities, more than one-third of the 330 votes cast in the 17th precinct that election day were fraudulent. … In over two hours of voting, approximately 52 residents voted. Appellant and the other election judges cast nearly all of those votes for the straight Democratic Party ticket by punching 10. During the voting, a Democratic Party election judge paid residents small amounts of money for their votes as appellant watched.”Hide quote

    On the day of the general election, Hicks distributed ballot applications, along with the names of registered voters who had moved away or died, to the election judges, including the appellant. The election judges completed the ballot applications with the names of the phantom voters. Then, using the fraudulent ballot applications, the election judges cast votes according to Hicks’ instructions. … Appellant watched as Hicks solicited voters and paid them $2.00 per vote. As a result of these activities, more than one-third of the 330 votes cast in the 17th precinct that election day were fraudulent. … In over two hours of voting, approximately 52 residents voted. Appellant and the other election judges cast nearly all of those votes for the straight Democratic Party ticket by punching 10. During the voting, a Democratic Party election judge paid residents small amounts of money for their votes as appellant watched.

21. Snapshot History: Maurice Milligan

    US Attorney's Office, Western District of Missouri, 2015-02-26 · supports

    “Local election results often showed vote totals for machine candidates that exceeded the total population in several wards and precincts. … U.S. Attorney Maurice M. Milligan and his staff prosecuted the resulting vote fraud cases for a total of 259 convictions.”Hide quote

    Local election results often showed vote totals for machine candidates that exceeded the total population in several wards and precincts. … U.S. Attorney Maurice M. Milligan and his staff prosecuted the resulting vote fraud cases for a total of 259 convictions.

22. Devoe v. United States, 103 F.2d 584 (8th Cir. 1939)

    US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (via Caselaw Access Project), 1939-05-03 · supports

    “Hayde succeeded in getting upon the list about 150 “ghosts and sleepers”; that late in October, 1936, Hayde asked Frances Ryan and Devoe how they were going to handle the precinct with respect to the “ghosts and sleepers” and whether they were going to send people to cast the “ghost and sleeper” vote; that they told him that they were not sending repeaters to the precinct, and that it would be easier to write in the votes for the “ghosts and sleepers” … that he prepared the ballots for the “ghosts and sleepers”, and, with some considerable difficulty, succeeded in stuffing the ballot box with these votes; that the stuffing was completed before the polls were closed; that the votes which had been cast were not counted … The Republican candidate for Congress received in fact 120 votes … His Democratic opponent was given 605 votes, when in fact he received 515 votes. … The judgment is affirmed.”Hide quote

    Hayde succeeded in getting upon the list about 150 “ghosts and sleepers”; that late in October, 1936, Hayde asked Frances Ryan and Devoe how they were going to handle the precinct with respect to the “ghosts and sleepers” and whether they were going to send people to cast the “ghost and sleeper” vote; that they told him that they were not sending repeaters to the precinct, and that it would be easier to write in the votes for the “ghosts and sleepers” … that he prepared the ballots for the “ghosts and sleepers”, and, with some considerable difficulty, succeeded in stuffing the ballot box with these votes; that the stuffing was completed before the polls were closed; that the votes which had been cast were not counted … The Republican candidate for Congress received in fact 120 votes … His Democratic opponent was given 605 votes, when in fact he received 515 votes. … The judgment is affirmed.

23. Johnson v. Stevenson, 170 F.2d 108 (5th Cir. 1948)

    US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (via Caselaw Access Project), 1948-10-07 · complicates

    “Johnson also filed under oath what he calls an opposition to the temporary injunction which takes issue with some of the factual allegations of the petition and proposes at a proper time and in a proper forum to show illegal votes in larger numbers which were counted for Stevenson than those Stevenson claims were fraudulently counted for Johnson.”Hide quote

    Johnson also filed under oath what he calls an opposition to the temporary injunction which takes issue with some of the factual allegations of the petition and proposes at a proper time and in a proper forum to show illegal votes in larger numbers which were counted for Stevenson than those Stevenson claims were fraudulently counted for Johnson.

24. New Mexico election standoff and ‘attack on democracy’ ends

    KOB 4, 2022-06-18 · supports

    “A standoff ended Friday when a group of defiant local officials in New Mexico gave in to the state and voted to certify their June 7 primary election results, after they had been refusing to do so. … The New Mexico Supreme Court unanimously ordered them to certify the votes by Friday’s deadline”Hide quote

    A standoff ended Friday when a group of defiant local officials in New Mexico gave in to the state and voted to certify their June 7 primary election results, after they had been refusing to do so. … The New Mexico Supreme Court unanimously ordered them to certify the votes by Friday’s deadline

25. Arizona’s Cochise County wants federal investigation of 2022 election

    Votebeat, 2025-09-17 · supports

    “two Republican Cochise supervisors in November 2022 to vote to delay the certification of the county’s midterm election results past the legal deadline. A judge later ordered the supervisors to certify the election. A year after their vote to delay the certification, a state grand jury indicted the two supervisors, Tom Crosby and Peggy Judd, on charges of conspiracy and interference with an elections officer. Judd has since pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor. But Crosby pleaded not guilty, and is awaiting a trial.”Hide quote

    two Republican Cochise supervisors in November 2022 to vote to delay the certification of the county’s midterm election results past the legal deadline. A judge later ordered the supervisors to certify the election. A year after their vote to delay the certification, a state grand jury indicted the two supervisors, Tom Crosby and Peggy Judd, on charges of conspiracy and interference with an elections officer. Judd has since pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor. But Crosby pleaded not guilty, and is awaiting a trial.

26. Judge dismisses Kari Lake's final claim in election loss for Arizona governor

    Associated Press (via KSAT), 2023-05-23 · complicates

    “Thompson said Lake failed to prove her claim that Maricopa County did not verify signatures on mail ballots as required by law. ... She filed suit after losing to Hobbs by about 17,000 votes, asking the courts to install her as governor or order a new election.”Hide quote

    Thompson said Lake failed to prove her claim that Maricopa County did not verify signatures on mail ballots as required by law. ... She filed suit after losing to Hobbs by about 17,000 votes, asking the courts to install her as governor or order a new election.

27. One-in-Five Mail-In Voters Admit They Cheated in 2020 Election

    Rasmussen Reports, 2023-12-12 · complicates

    “A new national telephone and online survey by Rasmussen Reports and The Heartland Institute finds that 21% of Likely U.S. voters who voted by absentee or mail-in ballot in the 2020 election say they filled out a ballot, in part or in full, on behalf of a friend or family member, such as a spouse or child, while 78% say they didn't. ... The survey of 1,085 U.S. Likely Voters was conducted on November 30-December 6, 2023 by Rasmussen Reports and The Heartland Institute.”Hide quote

    A new national telephone and online survey by Rasmussen Reports and The Heartland Institute finds that 21% of Likely U.S. voters who voted by absentee or mail-in ballot in the 2020 election say they filled out a ballot, in part or in full, on behalf of a friend or family member, such as a spouse or child, while 78% say they didn't. ... The survey of 1,085 U.S. Likely Voters was conducted on November 30-December 6, 2023 by Rasmussen Reports and The Heartland Institute.

28. Trump's Latest Bogus Claim About Mail-In Vote Fraud in Pennsylvania

    FactCheck.org, 2024-09-20 · contests

    “"[T]he vast majority of Rasmussen data come from an ordinary opt-in online panel" in which participants actively seek to join rather than being randomly selected, "which AAPOR tells you cannot have a margin of error, because there is no systematic sampling involved," Krosnick said. … "[T]he results are wildly out of line with literally all other incoming information, including the rate of ballots flagged in any jurisdiction anywhere in the country for signature mismatches," Levitt told us via email.”Hide quote

    "[T]he vast majority of Rasmussen data come from an ordinary opt-in online panel" in which participants actively seek to join rather than being randomly selected, "which AAPOR tells you cannot have a margin of error, because there is no systematic sampling involved," Krosnick said. … "[T]he results are wildly out of line with literally all other incoming information, including the rate of ballots flagged in any jurisdiction anywhere in the country for signature mismatches," Levitt told us via email.

29. Report to Congress on the Activities and Operations of the Public Integrity Section for 1983

    US Department of Justice, Public Integrity Section, 1984-04 · supports

    “Alice Mae Yarborough and her daughter Vernie Mae Yarborough pled guilty to one count of multiple voting in the June 8, 1982 primary election in Darlington County, South Carolina … In Statesville, North Carolina, five defendants were convicted and sentenced for their roles in subverting the 1982 general election in Alexander County, North Carolina. … The Yarboroughs were poil officials who utilized their access to the poll list an voting machine to forge voter's names and vote numerous ballots for "no show" voters during the election. … The indictment alleged that the defendants defrauded the voters of Luzerne County of their right to fair and non-corrupt elections by submitting false and fraudulent absentee ballot materials. … A federal jury had convicted four of the defendants of mail fraud, conspiracy, and multiple-voting for their fraudulent voting of absentee ballots of nursing home residents. … The lead defendants, Deputy Sheriff Mark Douglas Odom and Deputy Clerk of Court Joyce Geraldine Beach … In Bryson City, North Carolina, eight defendants were convicted and sentenced for their roles in subverting the November 1982 election in Clay County, North Carolina. The trial evidence showed a massive vote-buying scheme, with the detendants purchasing votes for the Democratic Party slate at prices ranging between $50 and $125 per voter. … Former Republican Sheriff Hartsell Moore, who was defeated by Barnard in his 1982 reelection effort, received a prison term of 15 months and a $2,000 fine on his guilty plea to two counts of vote-buying. … a successful scheme to fraudulently affect the outcome of a close legislative contest for Missouri State Representative in 1980.”Hide quote

    Alice Mae Yarborough and her daughter Vernie Mae Yarborough pled guilty to one count of multiple voting in the June 8, 1982 primary election in Darlington County, South Carolina … In Statesville, North Carolina, five defendants were convicted and sentenced for their roles in subverting the 1982 general election in Alexander County, North Carolina. … The Yarboroughs were poil officials who utilized their access to the poll list an voting machine to forge voter's names and vote numerous ballots for "no show" voters during the election. … The indictment alleged that the defendants defrauded the voters of Luzerne County of their right to fair and non-corrupt elections by submitting false and fraudulent absentee ballot materials. … A federal jury had convicted four of the defendants of mail fraud, conspiracy, and multiple-voting for their fraudulent voting of absentee ballots of nursing home residents. … The lead defendants, Deputy Sheriff Mark Douglas Odom and Deputy Clerk of Court Joyce Geraldine Beach … In Bryson City, North Carolina, eight defendants were convicted and sentenced for their roles in subverting the November 1982 election in Clay County, North Carolina. The trial evidence showed a massive vote-buying scheme, with the detendants purchasing votes for the Democratic Party slate at prices ranging between $50 and $125 per voter. … Former Republican Sheriff Hartsell Moore, who was defeated by Barnard in his 1982 reelection effort, received a prison term of 15 months and a $2,000 fine on his guilty plea to two counts of vote-buying. … a successful scheme to fraudulently affect the outcome of a close legislative contest for Missouri State Representative in 1980.

30. United States v. Townsley, 843 F.2d 1070 (8th Cir. 1988)

    US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (via Caselaw Access Project), 1988-03-25 · supports

    “On one occasion Wellington Hamilton Lemmer (a campaign worker for the Seventh Ward Organization and a confidential government informant) entered Webbe’s office at the Seventh Ward Organization. Lemmer saw Webbe, Townsley (a close associate of Webbe, Jr. and an integral member of the Seventh Ward Organization) and two others with opened absentee ballots and observed that they were punching holes in the ballots. … For reasons to be stated, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”Hide quote

    On one occasion Wellington Hamilton Lemmer (a campaign worker for the Seventh Ward Organization and a confidential government informant) entered Webbe’s office at the Seventh Ward Organization. Lemmer saw Webbe, Townsley (a close associate of Webbe, Jr. and an integral member of the Seventh Ward Organization) and two others with opened absentee ballots and observed that they were punching holes in the ballots. … For reasons to be stated, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.