Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson is ignoring a request from a U.S. Congressional Committee to clarify the role of election challengers in reviewing the initial stage of mail-in ballot processing.
Two days after Benson testified before the Committee on House Administration on Sept. 11, chairman Bryan Steil, R-Wis., sent a letter to request that the Secretary of State clarify to “all County Clerks, that challengers are permitted at the initial stage of mail-in ballot processing.”
The letter continues: “If challengers can be present in the clerk offices, they should be able to perform all their usual functions, including challenging the eligibility of voters,” and adds, “But challengers can only perform that function if they are allowed to observe signature verification. However, it is the Committee’s understanding that at least some clerk offices believe challengers have no right to be present during the initial processing of mail ballots and signature verification.”
Go Ad-Free, Get Content, Go Premium Today - $1 Trial
Michigan Fair Elections explains the two-step process for mail-in ballots involves an initial review by local clerks to verify a voter is registered, when the ballot was received, and the signature on the ballot is correct.
The second step involves an absent voter counting board that tabulates approved mail-in ballots.
“There is no legitimate public policy reason to exclude challengers from the initial processing of mail ballots and signature verification. Excluding challengers from the room while clerk offices assess whether mail voters are registered and actually are who they say they are (through signature verification) prevents challengers from being able to vouch for the security of mail voting in Michigan,” Steil wrote to Benson. “The Committee cannot think of any countervailing policy considerations justifying the exclusion of challengers.”
The letter gave Benson until Sept. 23 to “confirm and communicate to the various clerk offices that challengers are permitted to observe initial processing of mail ballots and signature verification.”
Go Ad-Free, Get Content, Go Premium Today - $1 Trial
“This, in an event there is a contested House election in Michigan, it will assist us in assessing the reliability of the results. If challengers are not allowed to observe the initial processing of mail ballots and signature verification, inevitable doubts about the integrity of Michigan’s elections will arise,” Steil wrote. “After all, it seems absurd to permit challengers to observe in-person voting, but then to prohibit challengers from observing mail voting.”
Michigan Department of State Chief Legal Director Michael Brady responded to Steil’s request on Sept. 23, though he did not confirm whether Benson clarified the issue with local clerks.
Instead, Brady focused in on differentiating between roles for election observers and election challengers under Michigan law. Poll watchers are restricting to observing in a Public Viewing Area, while challengers have more latitude to challenge voter registrations, inspect voting applications and registrations, and observe ballot processing.
“Each challenger-credentialing organization may assign one challenger to observe the issuance and receipt of absent voter ballots at a clerk’s office or a satellite location maintained by the clerk, including an Election Day Vote Center,” Brady wrote. “A challenger may be present in the clerk’s office only when the office is open for business and during the period prior to an election when voters may request or return an absent voter ballot at the office.”
Patrice Johnson, founder of Michigan Fair Elections, explained why the latter is a problem.
“What people don’t realize is clerks aren’t always conducting the initial phase of the mail-in ballot processing in their offices during regular office hours. We have clerk sources here in Michigan telling us they take ballots home where they check the voter registration, document date and time of receipt and verify the signature,” Johnson said. “All that is happening with no challengers present.”
The situation creates an opportunity to cheat that could be avoided, Johnson argues.
“Mail-in ballots require more scrutiny and only the clerks are allowed to do it. And now clerks are inundated with mail-in ballots. Many clerks are serving in a part-time capacity, and so they are working sometimes from home just to keep up. It’s understandable, but it does create chain-of-custody questions and transparency problems,” Johnson said.
“And obviously, it is a situation bad actors could exploit,” she said. “How can we be sure registrations are checked? How do we know ballot signatures are actually verified? The truth is, we don’t.”