Virginia Regulatory Town Hall
Agency
Department of Elections
 
Board
State Board of Elections
 
chapter
Absentee Voting [1 VAC 20 ‑ 70]
Chapter is Exempt from Article 2 of the Administrative Process Act
Action Action Making an Illegible or Missing Postmark an Immaterial Omission on Absentee Ballot Envelopes
Stage Proposed
Comment Period Ended on 10/2/2020
spacer
Previous Comment     Next Comment     Back to List of Comments
9/23/20  12:59 pm
Commenter: Derrick Hess

Don't make fraud easier - preserve my right to vote - 1 person, 1 vote
 

It is insulting that the rules would need to be changed like this for the first time in our state's history.  We have had pandemics and wars in the past and this was never needed, if someone wants to vote, either go in person or submit your ballot in the mail with enough time for it to reach the polling station. The accountability is on the voter to show up and vote or to take measures to ensure their vote is counted on election day.  This change would allow criminal elements to drop off massive amounts of unmarked ballots through illegal means such as ballot harvesting or creating fraudulent ballots to upturn a winning candidate after voting has concluded on the day of election.  It is unnecessary as there should be almost no ballots being received three days after the election if a voter practiced accountable practices to vote either in person absentee, mailing an absentee a week in advance or voting in person.  Every legal vote counts and there has to be rules, we can't allow voting to go on for a week after election day, regardless of the circumstances.  Everyone in the country is aware of the situation and in VA, we can go an absentee vote in person or request a ballot far in advance of election day.  This change is not necessary and should not be put into practice.  The consequences could be disastrous for the state and the country if we see an election upturned 3 days after the election; especially if fraud is suspected because it was allowed to enter our process by making this change.

CommentID: 85470