Fox News - Rep. Greg Steube: "Universal Mail-In Voting Dangerous -- Here's Why Dems Plans So Reckless"

Op-Ed

By Rep. Greg Steube

Over national tragedies, world wars, eras of technological changes, and even pandemics, we have prioritized our electoral systems to protect our American democracy.

Despite our long history of electoral politics, the Democrats' latest political play is a fabricated conspiracy theory that Republicans are using the U.S. Postal Service's operational changes to disenfranchise the American people. Not only is this narrative not based in fact, but it is also a threat to the security of our elections.

The fact is that any changes to the USPS have nothing to do with universal mail-in voting. These changes began before President Trump even took office.

More importantly, the changes did not begin with any goal of slowing down our federal elections -- they began because the operational failures were costing American taxpayers billions in losses per year. However, regardless of the timeline for USPS changes, the mail-in voting issue is separate and should be treated as such.

To understand the true threats to our elections, it is important to start with the distinction between universal mail-in voting and absentee voting.

Though the Democrats prefer to ignore the difference, universal mail-in voting is when the state sends a mail-in ballot to every single registered voter, regardless if one has been requested or if the person is even a citizen or otherwise legally able to vote. For traditional absentee ballots, a registered voter must request a ballot and their identity must be authenticated.

Universal mail-in voting would be disastrous for our country, as there is no way of knowing who is actually voting. As we have seen in states with newly implemented universal mail-in voting, this practice is ripe for fraud and crippling logistical errors.

Take Virginia -- with their new electoral system nearly half a million ballots were sent to the wrong addresses, including to deceased people. With the bar set so low for accuracy and efficiency, we can almost guarantee inaccurate results.

In New York's 12th Congressional District, there was still not even a clear winner 45 days after the election because of delayed mail-in ballots. Paterson, N.J., is another example. During their recent special election, a councilman, a councilman-elect and two others were charged with election fraud for handling ballots they knew to be fraudulent.

These instances cannot become our standard for elections in the United States.

While blue states across the country continue to promote this mail-in scheme with zero safeguards against fraud, protections must be put in place to ensure the person voting is legitimate. We need to have faith in the accuracy of the results with verified voter ID and mailing deadlines adequate to accomplish security and completion for results on Nov. 3.

In my state of Florida, we have worked over many years to ensure our absentee voting system is secure and efficient. To make this work, we have put the important safeguards in place to preserve the integrity of elections.

Most importantly, all those requesting ballots must be registered to vote so the mail-in ballots are going to specific people. If their vote-by-mail ballot is returned undeliverable, it automatically cancels any pending requests for future elections and must be renewed. Florida also uses a sophisticated signature verification system with methods to challenge ballots or correct mistakes.

To give Florida election officials ample time to verify ballots, all vote-by-mail ballots must be sent no less than 10 days prior to Election Day.

Because of these specific protections, President Trump has endorsed Florida's vote-by-mail system.

Now, as we approach one of the most consequential elections in our nation's history, it is dishonest and irresponsible for the Democrats to even suggest that states can set up a "universal" mail-in system with so little time and zero safeguards.

The United States is the democracy it is because of the faith we have in the legitimacy of our elections. Implementing such radical changes to our electoral system this close to an election is reckless and should be very transparent to the American electorate.

Source