Patrick Semansky/AP Photo
In-person voting on February 29, 2020, in North Charleston, South Carolina
This story was supported by the Pulitzer Center.
As states consider how to hold this November’s general election safely during the coronavirus outbreak, amid a push from Democrats for massively expanding vote-by-mail, there are lessons to draw from what ended up being the most pivotal state in the Democratic primary: South Carolina. The Palmetto State’s democratic process—while efficient and impactful in the primary race—reveals the gap between the national vote-by-mail discourse and the election mechanics of a state with comparatively low absentee and early-voting participation.
A Prospect review of the February 29 South Carolina primary found more than 100 vote-by-mail ballots in total from about half the counties in the state were uncounted because of technical errors in ballot preparation. The votes were left uncounted largely at the discretion of county elections officials, who would get newfound power in a general election that relies heavily on mail-in ballots.
In states like South Carolina, with vote-by-mail laws that can function more like obstacles, the coronavirus is poised to add a new level of voter disenfranchisement.
The pandemic has exacerbated differences in voter accessibility across the country, as states prepare to expand vote-by-mail access to record numbers, or through a lack of action force citizens to risk their health by going to the polls in person (as Wisconsin did on April 7).
South Carolinians can only mail in ballots with one of 19 pre-approved state excuses, and before any ballots are counted, voters must meet a checklist of requirements. A voter must sign the envelope that holds their ballot; then they must have another U.S. citizen sign, as a witness, the envelope that holds the envelope that holds their ballot, remembering to also add their address. In the 2016 election, more than 600 ballots were not counted because they were missing a witness signature and address.
During a pandemic, anyone self-isolating alone or without another U.S. citizen in their household would find it difficult to complete that checklist. A similar witness signature requirement in Wisconsin sent voters scrambling during a pandemic to find someone to witness their ballots.
Oregon, Washington, Utah, Hawaii, and Colorado are the five states that already run elections with universal vote-by-mail access. They do not have witness signature laws. Nor does California, which is transitioning to the universal vote-by-mail model.
During a pandemic, anyone self-isolating alone or without another U.S. citizen in their household would find it difficult to meet witness signature requirements.
The number of votes not counted because of mistakes in following witness signature laws contributes to the election’s error rate. And when it comes to remedying errors, it can depend on who your election director or county clerk is. In South Carolina, it seems to also come down to the time a certain county has and that director’s interpretation of the state guideline.
A South Carolina Election Commission spokesperson told the Prospect that the official guideline is that ballots without the proper signatures are placed in “Attention Envelopes” and destroyed after 22 months. The Prospect reached out to the election directors of all 46 counties in South Carolina multiple times, asking about the status of uncounted ballots from the February primary. In total, 26 counties responded, revealing confusion over whether the counties were willing or even able to help voters remedy the ballots to get them counted.
The election director of Georgetown County told the Prospect, “State law does not provide an avenue for voters to remedy the missing witness signature.” In the primary, it had two ballots missing a witness signature, one ballot missing a voter signature, and four ballots received after the election.
On the other side of the state, the Lexington County director said his office also does not reach out to voters. In Lexington County, 12 ballots were not counted because of a missing witness signature. Meanwhile in neighboring Calhoun County, the director said that her office makes an effort to reach out to voters, although “time constraints limit our options.” In the primary, the county had no votes not counted because of a missing signature at the time to tally the results.
Of the 46 counties in South Carolina, there are 10 where the black population is more than 50 percent. Orangeburg, Hampton, Marlboro, and Marion responded to the Prospect. Of these, only the Marion County director said its office does not try to contact voters, and their error rate for ballots missing a witness signature was 11, the highest of any county that responded.
Richland County, which is home to the state capital Columbia, did not respond. Nor did Greenville County, which closed one-third of its polling places during primary voting this February without notifying voters in advance, and has the largest population of any county in South Carolina.
If the virus is still active in November, there could be record numbers of vote-by-mail demands. That likely means far higher error rates in a critical election.
In the 26 counties that responded, 71 absentee ballots were not counted because of a witness signature, 32 were missing a voter’s signature, and 46 were received after the election. The numbers, considering the over half a million votes cast in the election, are negligible. But voting in South Carolina was held before social-distancing measures became commonplace nationwide. In part because of the hurdles to absentee voting in the state, most people lined up at their respective polling places on Election Day. There is always higher voter turnout in general elections than in primaries, and if the virus is still active, there could be record numbers of vote-by-mail demands. That likely means far higher error rates in a critical election.
South Carolina’s absentee voting system is not unique. Ten other states permit mail-in voting only with an excuse. And 11 states require witness signatures with mail-in ballots, including swing states Wisconsin and North Carolina.
When it comes to federal laws to expand access to the ballot beyond physical polling sites, the limitations of every state’s current voting procedures will have to be considered and perhaps remedied, as well as the different ways a voter can continue to be disenfranchised.
“The goal for every member of Congress, every state legislature, and every election official should be simple: ensure that anyone who has the right to vote can exercise that right as simply and safely as possible,” said Matthew Harwood, of the Brennan Center for Justice. “Vote by mail is just one option among many to accomplish that goal.”
