The debate over whether to expand mail-in voting ahead of the 2020 presidential election has become one of the most contentious issues of the year, intertwining public health concerns, partisan politics and the reliability of the U.S. Postal Service. In Alabama and across the country, the argument has split largely along party lines, with proponents casting expanded absentee and mail voting as a safe alternative to crowded polling places during the coronavirus pandemic, and opponents warning it opens the door to ballot tampering and fraud.
Supporters of broader mail-in voting argue it removes barriers for voters who cannot easily get to the polls, whether because of work schedules, health concerns or lack of transportation. Some states have gone so far as to mail ballots automatically to every registered voter, without requiring a request first. Critics counter that flooding mailboxes with ballots, without safeguards, creates opportunities for people to vote on behalf of others or for campaigns to pressure voters while “helping” them fill out ballots at their doorstep.
Much of the concern nationally centers on the Postal Service’s ability to handle a surge in ballot volume. Mailing operations of any size are vulnerable to delays and mishandling, and moving tens of millions of ballots within a tight election-season window would be a significant logistical undertaking for an agency that has faced scrutiny over service reliability in recent years.
Locally, the concept of “vote harvesting” tied to absentee ballots is not a hypothetical worry for Mobile County — it has a documented history. In a 2013 runoff election for the Alabama House District 97 seat, Democratic candidates Adline Clarke and Karlos Finley finished nearly even in votes cast at the polls, but Clarke captured 153 of the 160 absentee ballots submitted, roughly 96 percent, a margin that proved decisive. Clarke’s campaign said at the time that workers had gone door-to-door helping residents get signed up to vote absentee.
Later that same year, the imbalance of absentee ballots again became a flashpoint during Mobile’s mayoral race between then-incumbent Sam Jones and challenger Sandy Stimpson. Postal inspectors opened an inquiry after a couple was spotted delivering tubs of absentee ballots to be mailed the day before the election. Both campaigns, mindful of what had unfolded in the Clarke-Finley race, worked to build up their own absentee ballot totals, and each ultimately banked a substantial number of votes cast by mail once the count was finished.
Alabama’s rules for absentee voting remain more restrictive than the all-mail systems some other states have adopted. Voters here must request an absentee ballot rather than receive one automatically, and state law requires absentee voters to submit a copy of a photo ID along with their ballot and have the ballot either notarized or witnessed by two adults. Those requirements faced a legal challenge earlier in 2020, with plaintiffs citing pandemic safety concerns, but the U.S. Supreme Court intervened over the summer to keep the ID and witness requirements in place, overturning a lower court ruling that would have suspended them.
Even with those safeguards, election observers note that absentee ballots have historically been the point in the process where campaigns push hardest to gain an edge, whether through organized ballot-collection efforts or door-to-door assistance that toes the line between helping voters and influencing them. Alabama law bars campaigning within a set distance of a polling place on Election Day, but no comparable restriction governs a campaign worker’s visit to a voter’s home to discuss an absentee ballot.
As more states weigh sending ballots to all registered voters this fall, Mobile County’s past absentee ballot disputes are being cited locally as a cautionary example of how even a small number of harvested votes — multiplied across precincts — can tip a close race. Election officials and political observers say the closer the presidential contest is nationally, the more likely accusations of irregularities, on either side, become part of the post-election fallout regardless of the outcome.