Earlier this month, the United States Postal Service (USPS) issued a proposed rule that would erect barriers to mail voting. The proposed amendments create unnecessary barriers to voting that could prevent eligible voters from receiving and returning their mail-in and absentee ballots and could disenfranchise eligible voters who are unable to vote in person.
Under the rule, USPS would need to verify that mailed ballots are being sent only to approved voters on a list supplied by states. This gives USPS a role in election administration that rightfully belongs to state and local election officials.
We all agree that election mail must be secure. But these new federal requirements would create barriers that could prevent eligible voters from exercising their right to vote.
Voting is a fundamental right that must be guaranteed. Voting by mail is part of that right and a critical part of the election process throughout the United States.
USPS is accepting public comment on the proposed rule until July 2 at 5 p.m. ET.
Defend the right to vote, protect mail voting, and ensure the role of states in the election process. Email your comment to PCFederalRegister@usps.gov, with the subject line “Ballot Mail.” Be sure to include your name and address.
Janice Langley
Joanne Schultz
Wendy Brown
League of Women Voters of San Luis Obispo County
This article appears in June 25 – July 2, 2026.
How, exactly, does requiring that ballots be mailed only to registered voters, disenfranchise anyone?
That’s already the law. Look it up. What isn’t law is the federal government’s executive branch (of which the USPS is part) having any role in our elections. The Constitution seems pretty clear on that, though I’m sure Alito and Thomas could reinterpret it somehow.
So you object to federal oversight of elections? Like has been done for decades to enforce rules requiring that minorities are given districts in which they dominate? Federal involvement is nothing new, and just ensuring that ballots are only sent to registered voters is hardly an onerous role.
I object to a current federal executive branch getting its hands on voter roles to pick and choose who can vote and who can’t. This administration has proven time and again that it will lie and ignore rules. Why is this even an issue? Every research study done on the subject has shown there is virtually zero voter fraud in this nation. Just because the president can somehow feel it in his fat gut that there’s cheating doesn’t make it true.
I obviously have no problem with the federal government in the form of a law passed in 1965 by Congress and signed by the president leveling the playing field for minorities. Unfortunately, an activist and rogue Supreme Court has destroyed what it took the civil rights movement decades to achieve. I guess old Jim Crow isn’t dead after all.
So federal participation in elections isn’t that much of a concern after all, and only bothers you when it might disadvantage Democrats by culling out dead people and noncitizens. The 1965 law didn’t level the playing field, but was gerrymandering to advantage a desired group over others.
Sure, pass a bill in Congress and then send it to the president. That’s what he wants anyway, and if such a law was passed giving the executive branch access to voter databases, I would have to live with it. At least until a Congress or the courts nullified it. Luckily, even many of the Republicans in the Senate know it’s a bad idea and no one would even be suggesting it if a Democrat was in the White House.
Yes, indeed, the voting rights act was a form of gerrymandering. It sought to give blacks political participation in the south, something they hadn’t had since the end of reconstruction. It has worked. Currently there are 61 black representatives in Congress which is roughly the same percentage as the black population in the U.S. I fear, however, that with the gutting of the VRA that number will drop as southern states aggressively gerrymander districts in the other direction.
And, by the way, how does the Post Office know if I’m dead? I would trust the county clerk’s office to have that information before the PO does. Likewise, how do they know if I’m not a citizen? I believe immigrants without citizenship still get mail.
Furthermore, according to a study done in 2020, a team of Stanford political scientists analyzed roughly 4.5 million voter records from the state of Washington for evidence of ballot fraud involving deceased individuals. They found 14 cases where a ballot may have been stolen and submitted on behalf of someone who had died, and even these cases may not have been fraud-related.
“We’re talking about 0.0003 percent of all voters over an 8-year period,” says Andrew Hall, a senior fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR) who conducted the study.
As for non-citizens, according to the Libertarian Cato Institute, the percentage rate at which non-citizens voted in recent elections also began with a 0.
It is simply comparing mailings with voter lists maintained by the state, to make sure that ballots are not being sent to the unregistered. It is not setting rules for the states, just making sure that they enforce their own. Why would you object to preventing cheating?
What cheating? You have evidence of such. I’d love to see your sources. Riddle me this, were you concerned about election fraud before Trump came along? I’ve been voting since 1958 and I have never seen evidence of it other than a few wackos like that Powell lady in this area who apparently voted illegally.
Voting fraud is by nature almost impossible to detect, so no one knows how often it occurs. Mayor Daily in Chicago was reportedly very good at mustering a good turnout by the dead. Additional oversights doesn’t hurt anything. Like the security check at the airport, having security in places discourages attempts.
Oh, good grief. Another Fox News talking point. It’s a secret so no one knows about it. It’s happening, my gut tells me it is, but I don’t know how, when or where. But it must be happening. If that’s the case then I would think you would have stopped voting or even caring, but considering the fact you would resort to ridiculous arguments such as this proves otherwise.
And, yes indeed, Daly did cheat and we have evidence that came out later. In fact, three Chicago poll workers were convicted of vote tampering in…1962, only two years after the 1960 election. How many have been convicted from the supposedly stolen 2020 election. Zero. But, some, including Giuliani, were convicted of their false accusations against poll workers.
Moreover, 1960 was a totally different time—no social media, no phones with cameras, no constant surveillance on public offices, etc. Do you really believe that an army of lawyers and election deniers, who could find nothing, were just looking in the wrong places in 2020?
Total rubbish, and I’m surprised that an educated man like yourself would subscribe to such lunacy.