The recent executive order by President Donald Trump is causing worry among people regarding the military voters that are away from their home states. The order, which aims to add election regulations, further complicates the already tedious process of absentee voting for those serving overseas.
Added Administrative Hurdles: Proof-of-Citizenship
The order’s critics, who view the changes as a blatant attack on military families, argue that voters’ registration will require stricter measures for proof of citizenship. Since most members of the military remain stationed abroad, they significantly undermine the effectiveness of the required documentation. Securely sending these documents, if they get them, to election officials becomes an immense obstacle.
Current Disputes over Election Integrity
This order emerges as various other disputes fight over Republican attempts to remove ballots cast outside the state. Other recent court decisions put at risk thousands of overseas ballots for a prior year’s North Carolina Supreme Court election. Such disputes add to the erosion of the exclusive rights military voters have.
The 1986 Act: An Overview of Cross-Party Endorsement
The Uniformed and Overseas Voting Act (UOCAVA) of 1986 sought to simplify the voting procedures for servicemen and women as well as voters living abroad. There was wide bipartisan endorsement for this legislation because it addressed the problematic scenarios encountered by those serving the country overseas. However, the focus by Trump on unfounded claims of election fraud has resulted in policies that may erode this support.
Access to Documents and Transmission Concerns: Issues to be Resolved
The practical problems facing military families are vividly captured by Sarah Streyder, Executive Director of Secure Families Initiative. Accessing and securely sending the required documents is difficult because of frequent moves and deployments. Streyder’s experience of voting from South Korea and the United Kingdom during a single election cycle shows the challenges that arise.
Mail Delay: The Most Notable Factor of Rejection
In the 2020 elections, nearly half of the military ballots that were considered ‘active’ were deleted for this one reason: their late arrival. Sending mail internationally is frequently delayed and often stops even those voters who act fast from meeting state deadlines.
Legal Disputes and Ambiguous Directives
The order from Trump also affects states that consider mail-in ballots postmarked after Election Day, a privilege given to military personnel and overseas voters in a number of regions. Legal disputes maintain that the order’s vagueness endangers these ballots. While exempting the UOCAVA ballots from the funding freeze, the order separately mandates the Attorney General to enforce a cutoff deadline for receipt of ballots on Election Day.
Borders Between State and Federal Jurisdictions: A Battle of Dominions
The order tries to gain control over state election policies through federal money and other means. No, however, voting policies tend to be the domain of local and state election officials. The whole premise is why Congress gave birth to the Combust on UOCAVA to provide relief for military voters.
Trump’s directive may limit the election’s accessibility for soldiers.
Results from DOD surveys indicate that in 2020, 80% of Americans residing abroad and failing to submit ballots noted the inability to seamlessly execute the process as the primary concern. As such, this detail underscores that the Trump directive could exacerbate the reduction in turnout among military voters.
Security Concerns: Protecting Sensitive Information
As former Justice Department attorney David Becker speaks to the security dangers surrounding the transmission of personal files. In his view, the order should not be put into effect until secure methods of transmission are established.
A Question of Fairness: Time Constraints and Deliberation
Military personnel have some of the most restrictive time windows, which limits their ability to fully engage in researching candidates and issues. Streyder persuasively contends this denial of time for deliberative processes is grossly unjust.
The Future of Military Voting: Uncertainty and Legal Battles
The executive order by Trump has introduced an element of unpredictability, which spawned legal disputes, suggesting concerns about the future of military voting. The evolution of turnout and the legal confrontations surrounding the order will determine the electorate’s experience while serving the country overseas.
