COVID-19 will affect voter turnout in November – but how? In the next few months, many states will probably change their rules for in-person and remote voting, and campaigns and advocacy groups will need to tailor “socially distanced” outreach and GOTV efforts to the new world order.
We want to help Democrats and progressives understand how COVID-19 is likely to change the general election, the impact on turnout in key regions and demographics, and how we can help Democratic candidates win up and down the ballot in November. (Primaries and other state elections before then are also important, but we’re not focusing on them.) Through research and expert interviews [see list at the end of this post], we’ve tried to address four initial questions:
Who’s going to set the rules for 2020 elections: states or the Feds?
Is there a chance Election Day will get postponed?
What’s likely to happen with in-person voting?
What’s likely to happen with mail-in voting?
This post is Part 1 of our effort to understand COVID-19’s impact on the 2020 election. In future posts, we’ll describe current status and likely outcomes in key states, estimate the quantitative impact of various scenarios on election models, and suggest impactful ways for individual Democrats and progressives to help Team Blue win in November in light of COVID-19. Please sign up to get blog updates via email, and follow us on Twitter and Facebook.
Organization of this post:
Federal vs. state powers regarding the 2020 election
Timing of the 2020 election
In-person voting – Current status and likely scenarios
Alternative voting – Current status and likely scenarios
Implications for Democrats and progressives
1. Federal vs. state powers regarding the 2020 election
There has been significant confusion about the roles of Federal and state governments in the 2020 election, particularly in light of (a) discussions in Democratic circles of adding election requirements to Federal coronavirus relief bills, and (b) the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to prevent Wisconsin from extending the absentee voting period for its election in April.
But in fact, individual states hold almost all of the decision-making power over 2020 election logistics:
U.S. legislative branch: Art. I, Sec. 4 of the Constitution gives states the power to regulate the “times, places, and manner” for holding elections for Federal offices. However, it also says that “Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations”.
In theory, this opens up the possibility for Congress to regulate election logistics. But in practice, virtually the only time in U.S. history it has done so has been in setting the date of Election Day (see below). Anything is possible, but experts we consulted saw it as highly unlikely that Congress would include any requirements on the states related to the timing or manner of 2020 voting in COVID-19 relief legislation.
Alternatively, Congress could provide incentives to states, by tying some COVID-19 funding to election logistics, like adopting no-excuse absentee ballots or a minimum period of advance in-person voting. (More on these specific items later.) This is slightly more plausible than an outright requirement, although passage into law may still be challenging in the current political environment.
U.S. judicial branch: Federal courts have very specific and limited authority over election logistics. The Constitution requires equal voting rights on the basis of race (15th Amendment), sex (19th Amendment), and age (26th Amendment), and prohibits poll taxes (24th Amendment), and it also prohibits states from infringing on citizens’ “equal protection of the laws” (14th Amendment). Also, various voting rights acts protect against voting discrimination on the basis of race, color, membership in a language minority group, disability, etc. Thus, a viable Federal case to forcibly expand voting access in 2020 would almost certainly need to show that the state’s rules violate one of these provisions. Experts we consulted said these are inherently difficult cases to win, and the Supreme Court’s current makeup makes success even less likely.
Importantly, the Wisconsin case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court on April 6 doesn’t change the general conclusion above. The majority in that case addressed a very narrow question of whether a state can “alter the election rules [in this case, related to the postmarking window for absentee ballots] on the eve of an election”. Similar cases could arise in the final run-up to Election Day, but experts told us they didn’t see a more general role for SCOTUS in regulating states’ general ability to set their own voting rules.
U.S. executive branch: Neither the President nor Federal agencies has jurisdiction over how states collect in-person and/or absentee ballots.
Bottom line: the states have essentially all of the decision-making power regarding election logistics, although the Federal legislature could provide some important incentives and resources. Importantly, the details of where that power lies within each state (legislature, Secretary of State, etc.) may vary.
2. Timing of the 2020 election
At this point, it’s safe to assume that COVID-19 won’t affect the date of the general election. Election Day 2020 will still occur as scheduled on Tuesday, November 3.
Election Day for Federal officials was set by Congress in 1845 (under powers granted by Art. I, Sec. 4 of the Constitution; see above). Congress could theoretically change the date for 2020, but in the current political climate, it’s hard to imagine that such legislation would pass both houses of Congress, let alone be signed into law.
(Technical note: It’s theoretically conceivable that a state could hold its Federal elections on November 3, but postpone voting for state-level offices — but it seems implausible that a state would make this illogical, impractical, and costly choice.)
3. In-person voting – Current status and likely scenarios
Currently, five states (CO, HI, OR, UT, WA) have all-mail elections. In the others, the current plan is to have at least some in-person voting on Election Day. Some states are discussing whether or not to move to all-mail for the general election in 2020, but experts told us that states only have until mid-May to pull the trigger on ditching in-person voting, and we think such radical action in a short period is unlikely. So in 45 states, we think there’s likely to be some form of in-person voting in November.
That said, each state has two main levers to pull to make in-person voting safer and more accessible in light of COVID-19. First, it could expand (or establish) advance in-person voting. As of now, at least 30 states will have at least some period of advance voting before Election Day in 2020. (VA just adopted the practice this year. DE did too, but it won’t go into effect until 2022.) The advance voting window ranges from 5 to 45 days in those states, and could certainly be extended. And there’s also a chance that the other 12 states could adopt advance voting for 2020.
In most states, responsibility for establishing or changing advance voting lies with the state legislature. (ND and NV leave the window length up to individual counties.) This means that the chance of a state changing its status in this regard depends on party control of the legislature (and the Governorship, to forestall a potential veto), as well as the legislative calendar. On the second point: many states have short legislative sessions that have been even further curtailed by COVID-19, so there may be logistical barriers to passing advance voting legislation, even if there were the desire to do so.
Each state will also likely make some changes in 2020 to enhance the safety of in-person voting – but this is a mixed bag. On the one hand, states may decide to increase social distancing by extending polling hours, adding polling sites (to reduce per-site per-hour traffic), and/or moving polling sites to larger venues. On the other hand, many election officials are also concerned about poll workers, who are mostly elderly and have been in short supply in recent primaries. So paradoxically, COVID-19 could lead to a decrease in available in-person polling places, which could make it more dangerous for voters to cast ballots.
Control over the details of in-person voting varies by state, and typically involves an interplay of the Secretary of State and local election officials. In most cases, the changes would be administrative actions that would not require legislative authority. Besides the political considerations that underlie whether or not to expand safe in-person voting, another key consideration relates to the availability of funding and staff. Most election costs are borne locally, so increased state or Federal aid could help defray the expenses of hiring additional poll workers, keeping polls open longer, and moving to larger venues.
4. Alternative voting – Current status and likely scenarios
It’s highly unlikely that any state will implement a brand new technology like e-voting before November, so realistically, the main “alternative” to in-person voting in play is vote by mail (VBM). In virtually all states, VBM would most likely leverage the current infrastructure and policies for absentee ballots.
Although all 45 states with in-person voting have absentee ballots available, there are two key considerations for the 2020 general election. First is whether a state has “no-excuse” or “restricted” absentee ballots. About half the states restrict absentee ballots to people in certain circumstances, like those who attest they’ll be out of town on Election Day. But even without adopting no-excuse VBM, states with restrictions could temporarily increase the availability of absentee ballots for 2020. For example, VA added fear of COVID-19 infection to its list of permitted reasons to vote by mail in the 2020 primaries. In most states, changing absentee ballot rules would require state legislative action. (In some, like MA, the process is more complex, and changes are virtually impossible for 2020.)
The second key aspect to VBM in 2020 is how much a state will seek to boost access to absentee ballots. Even in “no-excuse” states, there’s likely to be a huge difference in turnout between states that mail every registered voter an absentee ballot, those that send everyone a VBM application, and those that do little to nothing to encourage VBM. As with in-person voting on Election Day, the details are likely to be driven by a combination of politics (at the level of Secretary of State and/or local election officials) and economics.
5. Implications for Democrats and progressives
Although we’re still six months out from Election Day, we think it’s safe to make a few conclusions about how COVID-19 will affect the 2020 election:
COVID-19 will have a “triple whammy” effect on the 2020 election. As noted above, each voter’s options are likely to evolve, and even experienced voters may be confused. It’s also likely that voters will have lingering fears of gathering in groups, which will significantly affect in-person turnout. And of course, in-person canvassing and GOTV will take a major hit due to social distancing.
Each state’s situation will be unique. There are always state-specific nuances to how one registers and turns out voters, but in 2020 they’ll be accentuated, and evolve rapidly over a short time period. This means most campaigns’ and organizations’ “2020 playbooks” – especially ones that depend on similarities across states – are no longer valid.
A “super-turnout” election is a bigger lift. Some election forecasters were predicting a turnout-driven Blue Wave in 2020. Today, this seems less plausible unless candidates and key organizations become very creative and effective – and fast.
Marginalized voters will be particularly disadvantaged. Highly motivated voters in higher socioeconomic and educational strata will find a way to adapt to whatever the rules are in their state. But without a major effort by Democratic and progressive groups, voters on the wrong side of the “digital divide” will have even more problems than usual not just registering and voting, but even figuring out what their voting options are.
In future posts, we’re going to dig into more implications of COVID-19 for the 2020 election – please sign up to get blog updates via email, and follow us on Twitter and Facebook. Topics to come include:
State-by-state rundown of current voting rules and other key data
Quantitative impact of various scenarios on election models
Impactful ways for individual Democrats and progressives to help Team Blue win in November in light of COVID-19
Finally – we are deeply grateful to the experts who spent time speaking with us about this topic: Phil Keisling (Vote at Home / Portland State University); Chip Lupu (George Washington University); Andrew Menger (Washington University in St. Louis); Myrna Perez (Brennan Center); Cathy Shaw (author and political strategist); and Bob Stein (Rice University). We take full responsibility for all of the content in this post; any errors of omission or commission are ours alone. Please let us know via email if you have suggested edits.