Letter to the Editor - Sad to see one-sided editorial on mail ballots

To the Editor,

Your Aug. 14 editorial says “All of the arguments against mail ballots have been debunked.” By whom? You? It is naïve to think the only human endeavor in which people won’t lie, commit fraud, or make mistakes is in elections, especially general elections. In the last two months, New Jersey officials were charged with voter fraud after hundreds of ballots were found in a mailbox in Paterson, a New York race had 100s of disputed ballots including missing postmarks, and a West Virginia mail carrier was charged with altering voter mail.

In person we can buy groceries, shop, eat at cafes and get license plates at the courthouse. I was present at the commissioners meeting. If we can do these things, why can’t voting be in person and conducted in a safe manner as well? Yes there are challenges. But what is more important in a democracy?

There were about 300 undeliverable primary ballots returned to the Hill County election officials. Over 202 of those still have not been updated. Yet, they said in an all mail general election they would still have to mail ballots to those addresses.

Under Montana law, a voter can vote one time at an old precinct even though they have moved. A person could deliberately or in error vote in another state and still vote a mail ballot received from Montana.

It appeared that under all mail balloting for Hill County, in person voting could only be done at one place, the courthouse. It was unclear if the instructions with the all mail ballot even say you can still vote in person.

People must be able to vote in person to preserve a totally secret ballot. People who want to vote absentee can do so. Voters should be able to be sure their vote is not canceled out by someone committing deliberate or inadvertent fraud facilitated by mass ballot mailings.

Do you want to change your headline to shame Wal-Mart, IGA, the Duck Inn and every other business in town that allows their staff to help customers? There are many more issues that could be discussed. It was sad to see you present such a one-sided position.

Pamela Harada

Havre