There is no basis, statutory or otherwise, for the Dept. of Elections to declare that the omission of a postmark is not a material omission.  If there were a plausible or logical reason to consider such an omission not to be material, the department should have set that out in in the guidance document accompanying the text of the proposed change.  It did not do so.

Sec. 24.2-707 defines which omissions in the absentee ballot process are not to be considered material, thereby allowing the ballot to be counted.  The omission of a postmark is not one of those items.  The law is very clear that an absentee ballot can be counted if it is received within three days of election day and is postmarked no later than election day.  If the requirement of a postmark were not material, the General Assembly would have said so. 

Adopting this change will just invite unnecessary law suits and further complicate the election.  Worse, it would create the public perception that the department was being arbitrary and trying to improperly influence the election.