Policy Brief  

Ensuring All Votes Count: Reducing Rejected Ballots

This brief studies trends in mail ballot rejection rates in 2020 compared to previous years and how different factors, including sets of policies and policy changes, the political environment, and voter outreach, may have contributed to these changes in an extraordinary election year. Our main findings include:

  • Mail ballot rejection rates decreased in most states in 2020 compared to 2018, and a number of states saw a consistent drop from 2016 to 2018 to 2020.
  • Certain states that adapted their voting laws to make mail voting more accessible in 2020, particularly in the South, saw especially pronounced changes in rejection rates.
  • In North Carolina, rejection rates vary from county to county. Previous studies of other states’ rejection rates found similar trends.
  • States that implemented mail ballot policies, including ballot curing, increased ease of access when returning mail ballots at boards of elections, early voting sites, drop boxes, and ballot tracking, saw lower rejection rates than those that didn’t, though we caution against assuming a causal relationship.
  • Previous academic and advocacy research suggests that voters of color, young voters, and first-time voters are disproportionately more likely to have their mail ballots rejected.

We highlight these trends and suggest further areas of study that researchers, advocates, organizers, and policymakers can explore to better understand how voters casting their ballots by mail can ensure their votes are counted.

Related Resources

Terms of Engagement – How did the Democrats Lose Silicon Valley? Should They Try to Get it Back?
A photo of Silicon Valley with the Terms of Engagement logo and a headshot of Van Jones.

Podcast

Terms of Engagement – How did the Democrats Lose Silicon Valley? Should They Try to Get it Back?

The relationship between Silicon Valley and the Democratic Party has undergone a dramatic shift over the past decade, with many tech leaders moving away from their once-strong political alignment. This special episode of Terms of Engagement explores what drove that change and what it means for the future of democracy, political power, and the influence of technology elites.

Terms of Engagement – Sedition, Partisanship, and the Future of American Justice

Podcast

Terms of Engagement – Sedition, Partisanship, and the Future of American Justice

Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Troy Edwards, who was a leading prosecutor in the case of the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, joins Terms of Engagement to discuss the Trump Administration’s move to vacate the seditious conspiracy convictions of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys and what it means for the future of the Department of Justice and the rule of law.

Terms of Engagement – American Birthright: The Constitution, Citizenship, and Immigration

Podcast

Terms of Engagement – American Birthright: The Constitution, Citizenship, and Immigration

Penn University Professor Emeritus Rogers Smith joins Terms of Engagement hosts Archon Fung and Stephen Richer to discusses birthright citizenship, an American institution enshrined in the Constitution but increasingly under scrutiny from President Trump and his allies.

More on this Issue

VIDEOS: After Neoliberalism From Left to Right

Additional Resource

VIDEOS: After Neoliberalism From Left to Right

After Neoliberalism: From Left to Right brought together hundreds of leading economists, political scientists, journalists, writers and thinkers from across the political spectrum to explore and debate emerging visions for the future of the political economy.

Panel videos below.

The Present — and Future — of Alternatives to Police

Commentary

The Present — and Future — of Alternatives to Police

Allen Lab Affiliate Benjamin A. Barsky examines alternative emergency response programs — arguing for a democratic model of public safety governance in which responses to nonviolent incidents are shared across government and civil society rather than dominated by police.