Tag: UOCAVA

Posted on

Beyond the Ballot with Paul Pate: Election Official’s History of Public Service, Business and Political Success Led to Transforming Secretary of State Role

By Lexington Souers, Communications Associate

Raised in a family focused on giving back, and pulling from a successful career in business, Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate recognized the power of government action.

At age 29, Pate became the youngest member of the Iowa Senate and embarked on a path toward his current role. Following the conclusion of his first of two spells as secretary of state in 1998, Pate continued his service to Iowans as mayor of Cedar Rapids and president of Iowa’s League of Cities. He also served at the national level with the U.S. Conference of Mayors, with a specific focus on housing.

“I was raised in a family where my folks really underscored public service and giving back,” Pate said. “If you’re going to be fortunate enough to do well in life, you need to give back. We live in great communities and great states, but not everybody has the same successes, and you want to try to bring some of that back to them.”

Throughout Pate’s tenure in each role, he saw the impact that he and his staff were making. Similar to his broad reach as secretary of state, his role as president of Iowa’s League of Cities allowed him to be a difference maker for the residents, he represented in more than 900 Iowa cities.

“That was an eye opener,” Pate said. “You’re talking about towns as small as a couple of 100 people compared to our larger cities, and trying to balance out how we help all those communities have the resources and knowledge they need to be competitive.”

Nearly eight years ago, Pate returned to the Iowa Office of the Secretary of State. This time, he entered with increased attention on elections due to rapid changes in technology. According to Pate, he needed “jumpstart” those effort in the office, especially given the rise of social media and voting by mail.

Pate stressed the need for a trusted source for elections, whether it through his office or the local elections commissioner.

“The big concern I had then, and I have today even more so, is if the public loses confidence in the integrity of our election for whatever reason — whether it’s foreign interference or even local — then our republic has fallen,” Pate said. “And they wouldn’t have done it without firing a single shot. That’s alarming to me.”

Pate promotes a “trusted source” approach, which includes voter I.D. laws, random audits of elections and public pretesting of tabulators. While he said there are still hurdles, being transparent has led to increased trust and support by the public.

Increasing overseas voting and the role of military voters was also an important goal for Pate, who promoted a 120-day extension for certain service members. He added auditing occurs for military members requesting absentee ballots, accounting for how military service has changed. Included among these members are an influx of reservists and guardsmen who have been posted overseas.

“They are voters. They have a lot of involvement and commitment to their local communities because they know the candidates in their town,” Pate said. “They still want to stay in touch with that. We work hard with the local command and make sure those folks have what they need. I’m not going to just count on somebody handling it from the military or the Department of Defense. I want to do what we can on the local level to give them that information.”

Iowa Safe at Home is another program endorsed by Pate, offering address confidentiality for victims of domestic violence and other crimes. Through the program, victims can register their addresses with the Office of the Secretary of State, protecting what would otherwise be public information from potential bad actors.

“I can report now that we’re seeing a significant uptick of folks who are survivors of very unfortunate situations that have come out of the dark to rejoin their communities and are stepping up and voting again,” Pate said. “I think Safe at Home is a big part of that.”

Iowa has one of the highest voter turnouts in the country, which Pate attributes to Iowa’s community and length of life as well as a civically minded culture. Pate said he supports a curriculum for students to understand the importance of Iowa’s caucus system. Students, in turn, help educate their parents. Teachers can also use an Elections 101 curriculum to provide modules showing the importance of elections.

Before the formal election, youth from across the state participate in a youth straw poll. The Office of the Secretary of State provides a digital copy of the official ballot or students can vote using an online poll. Results are reported in real time.

“I find the straw poll very intriguing because we do it ahead of the adult election and these young people across the state are pretty darn close to being on the mark of what the results will be,” Pate said. “When we dug a little deeper, we found out you can attribute it to — believe it or not — people still talk over the dinner table. This shows me that the parents and kids are talking about it.”

Education outside of the classroom became a key component of Pate’s role as secretary of state, especially given the rise in misinformation. Pate said it is not his role to censor free speech, but instead ensure Iowans know when and where to vote, among other key points. This is done through voter ready websites and online voter registration, as well as partnering with organizations like the NAACP and the NRA to promote voter toolkits.

“I believe myself and my colleagues are the referees,” Pate said. “We administer the laws of the land and make sure we offer as much transparency as we can. That consistency and transparency is what the voters need and expect to have confidence in the elections process. The more I, and my peers, can make sure that is out there, upfront on a regular basis, the more successful we will be on both encouraging people to vote and believing in the results.”

Pate and his office partner with numerous federal organizations to monitor the security of Iowa’s elections at every level. The FBI, CIA and even white hat hackers are among them. Local offices are often smaller and are handling more than just elections, according to Pate. As a result, the statewide office may need to handle trainings, recruiting poll workers or security measures.

“I’ve been able to push out that security to our local level because you’re only as good as your weakest point,” Pate said. “With 99 jurisdictions out there, we wanted to make sure they had the same kind of protection. We have endpoint protection for them, which means 24 hours a day we’re monitoring their systems for outside intrusions so no one can manipulate our voter databases.”

Posted on

Beyond the Ballot with Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver: Dedication to State Government and Elections Drive Secretary of State’s Career

By Morgan Thomas, Policy Associate

Growing up in Albuquerque, New Mexico, Secretary Maggie Toulouse Oliver always wanted to work in government. However, like most election officials, Secretary Toulouse Oliver didn’t grow up dreaming of one day becoming an election administrator. Her passion for elections grew as she gained more experience working on campaigns, voter education and outreach. Now having worked in elections for over two decades, Toulouse Oliver has leveraged her work experience to become the 26th Secretary of State of New Mexico.

Continue reading “Beyond the Ballot with Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver: Dedication to State Government and Elections Drive Secretary of State’s Career”
Posted on

Voting in Presidential Primaries and the General Election Differ for UOCAVA Voters

By Grace Gordon, Research Lead and Project Manager

Introduction

Presidential primaries work in unique and complex ways for overseas voters. Overseas citizens can vote in either their state-specific primary or, in some cases, a primary explicitly for overseas citizens. However, registering to vote in a presidential primary specifically for overseas citizens does not constitute registration for your state’s upcoming elections.

Before the 2024 presidential election, all overseas voters should ensure their state voter registration is up to date. To do this, overseas voters must double-check with their state or local election office ahead of the UOCAVA registration deadline for November’s presidential election. To ensure they receive their ballot in time, these voters should register using the Federal Post Card Application (FPCA) or through the voters’ home state formal process.

Background

In 1986, Congress passed the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA). This act permitted “absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters to use absentee registration procedures and to vote by absentee ballot in general, special, primary, and runoff elections for Federal office.” All states have designated processes for overseas voters to register to vote and cast a ballot. While the methods differ from state to state, all states accept the Federal Post Card Application as a form of registration for federal elections. For presidential party primaries, there are different methods for overseas voters to register to vote and cast a ballot.

In general elections, known as presidential elections, voters vote in their home state and electors in that state cast their vote for president based on the popular vote. Party primaries differ from the general election in several ways. Instead of electors casting votes based on the election results in each state or territory, delegates cast votes at the party convention. Each party has a different process for selecting delegates. Most delegates for the Democratic convention are chosen based on proportional representation. Whereas the Republican party primary uses a combination of proportional and winner-take-all representation decided by the states. Democrats Abroad is an organization that conducts a Global Presidential Primary for all overseas voters registered with the organization. Democrats Abroad receives several votes at the Democratic National Convention, which are allocated to delegates based on the results of the Global Presidential Primary.

Overseas voters who want to register to vote in the Democratic primary have two paths. They can register directly with Democrats Abroad and have their vote count towards the Democrats Abroad delegate allocation, or they can register directly with their state and put their vote towards their states’ delegates. There is no organization equivalent for registered Republicans, and Republicans living overseas must register with their state to vote in the Republican Party Primary.

All voters must register to vote for the general election in their state regardless of their political party affiliation. Voters registered with Democrats Abroad in the primary must ensure that their state registration is active through the state absentee registration process or use the FPCA to register and cast a ballot.

FPCA and Voter Registration Processes

The FPCA offers a streamlined, easy-to-use voter registration and absentee ballot request form for overseas voters. In some states, the FPCA is accepted as an application to vote for all state and federal contests; in others, it is just a request for federal contests. To access the form, qualified voters can go to https://www.fvap.gov/uploads/FVAP/Forms/fpca.pdf.

Most state election websites offer detailed instructions on registering as a UOCAVA voter. The state or municipal voter registration process may offer another option for voters who prefer to register directly with their state rather than using the FPCA.

The Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP) has numerous resources for military and overseas voters seeking to register to vote in either the primaries or the general election. The following resources directly apply to this topic:

How to check your voter registration as an overseas voter

For overseas voters who cast a ballot in the primaries and are unsure if they are registered for the general election, the following steps can be used to check their voter registration in their home state:

  1. Do not rely on third-party groups to confirm voter registration status.
  2. Identify the state or local election office website, phone number or email.
  3. Contact an election official, ideally in the municipality where they are registered to vote. Some states offer a state voter registration lookup tool. In others, the overseas citizen will need to call or send an email to confirm their registration.
  4. Any overseas citizens who are not registered can register to vote in the primary using the FPCA or state/municipal voter registration process. The deadline to register for UOCAVA voters is 30 days before the general election for federal offices but varies for state and municipal elections.

Conclusion

UOCAVA voters face extra hurdles when voting abroad. These include delays in international mail, difficulty accessing printers to print ballots or other election materials and challenges delivering their ballots back to their election office. Many states allow voters to fax their ballots back to the US, though access to fax machines continues to dwindle worldwide.

Election officials do everything they can to ensure UOCAVA voters have equal access to the ballot. Still, if a voter does not register to vote and indicate their international address, election officials cannot send them a ballot. To complicate matters, some overseas voters may vote in primary elections explicitly for overseas voters. Overseas voters who voted in the Democrats Abroad Global Presidential Primary must register to vote for the general election in their state. Registration with Democrats Abroad does not imply registration with a state for the general election. To ensure overseas voters who want to vote in the general election can do so, all overseas voters should double-check their voter registration as soon as possible.

Posted on

Voter Registration for Americans Abroad: Strategies to Address Common Challenges

By Rachel Wright, Policy Analyst

In 2022, nearly 4.4 million American citizens lived overseas. The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) guarantees their right to vote absentee in federal elections, and like voters living stateside, many overseas citizens want to exercise this right. However, whether they are expatriates, students or peace corps volunteers, their path to the ballot box is often fraught with challenges.

For many voters, this path begins with the voter registration process. UOCAVA sets out to provide overseas citizens with a uniform and accessible means of registration by allowing them to use the Federal Postcard Application (FPCA) and the Federal Write-In Absentee Ballot (FWAB). The conditions surrounding registration deadlines, allowed return methods and validity periods, among other things, vary significantly among states.

Election officials often help overseas voters by reducing the challenges they face. The Overseas Voting Initiative (OVI) works closely with state and local election officials to better understand these challenges and share best practices related to overseas voting. Provided below are several common voter registration challenges faced by overseas citizens, along with strategies that working group members have developed to mitigate them.

International Mail System Reliability

Mail system reliability varies across countries and can pose a significant challenge for voters who return their FPCA via mail. The FPCA is a standard form developed by the Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP) that allows a UOCAVA voter to simultaneously register to vote and request an absentee ballot. It can be easily downloaded from FVAP’s website or accessed via your state or local election official’s website.

As of August 2024, three states — Alabama, Arkansas and Connecticut — only allow for an FPCA to be returned via mail. Voters in states that allow for electronic return may also default to mailing their FPCA if they are not sure of their state’s requirements. For these voters, utilizing an unreliable mail system may negatively impact the likelihood that their registration materials and ballot request will be received on time and by the proper election authority.

The impact of mail system reliability on the return of voter registration materials such as the FPCA is yet to be quantified. We do, however, know the impact it has on ballot success. A 2016 FVAP study found that overseas citizens in countries with the most reliable postal systems were 65% more likely to have a vote recorded compared to those in countries with the lowest observed levels of postal reliability. This figure, although stark, does not account for the number of voters who may not have received a ballot due to unsuccessful attempts to return their FPCA via mail.

Strategy 1: In states that allow for electronic return, election officials can encourage overseas citizens to return their FPCA electronically and communicate this information to voters via dedicated UOCAVA webpages and social media. Should a voter return their FPCA via email, election officials can use this touchpoint to establish open and consistent lines of communication to update voters on the status of their FPCA, upcoming deadlines and allowed return ballot methods. FVAP has developed an outreach toolkit for the 2024 election that contains email templates for these touchpoints. This toolkit can be accessed here.  

Strategy 2: In states that do not allow FPCAs to be returned electronically, election officials can clearly communicate voter registration deadlines (including postmark deadlines, if applicable) via UOCAVA webpages and social media. They can also encourage voters to return their FPCA as soon as they leave the U.S., regardless of where they are residing overseas. Many overseas citizens live in countries with high postal system reliability; however, the COVID-19 pandemic has shown that mail disruptions can occur anywhere and at any point in time. Returning an FPCA as soon as possible can help mitigate potential negative impacts caused by unforeseen international mail delays.

The FWAB as an Alternative Means of Voter Registration

The FWAB is intended to serve as a backup ballot and alternative means to register to vote if a military or overseas citizen does not receive their absentee ballot in time to meet their state’s deadlines. In select states, overseas citizens are not allowed to use the FWAB if they haven’t already registered to vote. This variation can lead to confusion, especially if these requirements change from year to year.

For example, as of August 2024, 33 states allow UOCAVA voters to use the FWAB to register to vote. Those in the remaining 17 states must be registered to vote and have already requested a state absentee ballot to use the FWAB. This includes overseas citizens from Hawaii and New York who were not subject to this requirement prior to 2024.

Moreover, confusion grows when states have differing requirements based on the type of UOCAVA voter. For example, Wisconsin only allows uniformed service members and their family to use the FWAB to register to vote. Overseas citizens must already be registered to vote to use the FWAB and can only use the FWAB to vote in elections for federal offices. More information about these rules is available in the “2024-25 Voting Assistance Guide.”

Map of U.S. states that allow UOCAVA voters to use the FWAB to register to vote.

Strategy 1: States can prevent confusion among overseas citizens surrounding whether they can use the FWAB to register to vote by instituting uniform requirements for all UOCAVA voters. This would entail allowing military service members, their family and overseas citizens to use the FWAB to vote in all elections for federal state and local offices, including ballot measures, regardless of whether the voter has registered to vote and requested a state ballot prior to using the FWAB. In doing so, states would simplify the voting process for overseas citizens and ensure all UOCAVA voters can utilize the same backup options.

Unintended Impacts of Automatic Voter Registration Systems

In states that utilize an automatic voter registration (AVR) system, UOCAVA voters may knowingly or unknowingly update their voter registration without realizing the unintended impacts it might have on their UOCAVA status. Although many systems allow voters to “opt-out” of automatic registration, many overseas citizens may not understand how automatic registration could impact their UOCAVA status and refrain from opting out.

For example, an overseas citizen may access a government service that uses the information gained throughout this transaction to update their voter registration. If the government agency does not collect information related to the voter’s UOCAVA status, their registration may be updated to indicate that they are a regular absentee voter. As a result, the overseas citizen may unknowingly be stripped of their UOCAVA status.

States and local jurisdictions have encountered similar issues with overseas citizens who renew their driver’s license or state ID online. In these instances, a voter has their new driver’s license or ID mailed to the address of a family member living stateside who then mails the ID to the UOCAVA voter. The DMV then uses the original mailing address provided to update the voter’s registration. In doing so, the voter may be stripped of their UOCAVA status, or, in some cases, registered as a voter in an entirely different jurisdiction.  

Third-Party Organization Involvement in the Voter Registration Process


Third-party organizations may communicate with overseas citizens regarding voter registration, upcoming elections and approaching deadlines. These efforts are made in good faith, but may result in overseas citizens receiving confusing, conflicting or incorrect information.

For example, state and local election officials have seen an increasing number of overseas citizens who have registered to vote in presidential primaries explicitly for overseas citizens through third-party organizations (e.g., the Democrats Abroad presidential primary). Voters believe that voting in this primary constitutes registration for an upcoming presidential election. This, however, is not true.

This trend underscores the need for election officials to conduct effective outreach to overseas citizens and establish open lines of communication so that they receive the most up to date and accurate election information.

Strategy 1: To prevent these scenarios, state election officials can build check points into their AVR system that notifies a UOCAVA voter’s local election official if the system is attempting to update their registration. The voter’s local election official will then investigate (i.e., communicate with the voter) to ensure their registration is updated with the correct information. States such as Oregon have already implemented these control procedures into their AVR system.

Strategy 2: States can also prevent overseas citizens from being unintentionally stripped of their UOCAVA status by allowing an FPCA to remain valid and in effect through the end of the election year regardless of whether the voter is registered via their state’s AVR system in the interim. UOCAVA requires all states to abide by certain provisions related to the FPCA. However, states do have the authority to determine its period of validity. States such as West Virginia have already implemented this measure.

U.S. citizens living abroad face significant barriers when attempting to vote that may prevent them from participating in U.S. elections. For many voters, these barriers arise as early as the voter registration process and persist even after they have returned their ballot. Proactive engagement by election officials, clear and consistent communication with overseas voters, and simplifying the voting process are key to helping every voter exercise their right to vote.

Posted on

How the Adoption of Secure Email Accounts and Sandboxing Techniques Strengthen the Electronic Ballot Return Process for South Carolina’s Military and Overseas Voters

Electronic Ballot Return Background

Military and overseas voters, and other U.S. citizens covered by the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA), face significant challenges when attempting to cast their ballot. Recent figures from the U.S. Department of Defense Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP) indicate that since 2016, there is a 60-65 percentage point gap in voting participation between U.S. domestic and overseas voters, depending on the type of federal election (presidential or midterm) being administered. Approximately half of this gap can be attributed to obstacles preventing those who want to vote from doing so.

While electronic ballot return presents potential benefits and a unique opportunity to improve voting outcomes among UOCAVA voters, balance between critical security considerations and ballot access is necessary for success. This challenge is discussed in The Council of State Governments (CSG) Overseas Voting Initiative (OVI) 2021 paper, Electronic Ballot Return for Military and Overseas Voters: Considerations for Achieving Balance Between Security and Ballot Access.

In this digital age, many jurisdictions have considered the potential risks and benefits of electronic ballot return and have opted to allow for some method of electronic return for UOCAVA voters. Thirty-one states have authorized some form of electronic return for those voting outside the polling place.* *Only 22 of these states have allowed UOCAVA voters to return their ballot via electronic mail. To mitigate the security risks associated with emailing ballots, states and local election jurisdictions continually deploy measures to verify the integrity of a voted ballot and protect local networks from malware.

Two such risk mitigation measures are the application of sandboxing techniques and the use of .gov email domains by election officials. In the cybersecurity field, a sandbox is another term for an isolated environment on a network that allows the secure review of material potentially infected with malware without risking harm to the host device or network.

Electronic Ballot Return via Email in South Carolina

South Carolina is among the 22 states allowing email return of marked ballots. In 2015, the legislature adopted §7-15-690 allowing the South Carolina State Election Commission to, “take all steps and action as may be necessary” to ensure that citizens covered by UOCAVA have the opportunity to vote. This direction authorized the State Election Commission to allow for the electronic return of marked ballots by all UOCAVA voters.

In South Carolina, as in most states and local election jurisdictions, limited resources have made it difficult for local election officials to acquire and update cutting-edge digital tools that help protect against continually evolving cyber threats. Election officials facing both resource and time constraints often have resorted to using platforms such as Google Mail and Yahoo Mail to conduct election-related duties. These commercial platforms do not necessarily have heightened security protocols in place that allow emails containing ballots to be robustly screened for malware and subsequently quarantined.

Statewide Adoption of Sandboxing Techniques in South Carolina

By late 2018, in an effort to apply heightened security protocols across all local election offices in South Carolina while still being mindful of costs, former Executive Director for the South Carolina Election Commission Marci Andino and her team began collaborating with South Carolina’s State Data Center to set up secure email addresses to be used by all 46 county election offices. The resulting accounts were set up with .gov domains to help voters better identify local election officials and therefore, give the voters confidence in the election information provided.

The creation of these secure email accounts also posed unique security benefits for local election officials. Through the State Data Center, sandboxing techniques were integrated into the new accounts to provide officials with enhanced and continuous protection against malware. In essence, sandboxing provides account holders with a more secure environment where electronic ballot attachments can be opened securely to isolate potential viruses or other malware. This is done prior to an email entering the local network or mail server. If threatening activity is detected, the email is flagged and the account holder is prevented from unknowingly opening the malicious content, thereby infecting their network.

Beginning in January 2019, all counties in South Carolina were required to either adopt the state-issued email account or provide the State Election Commission with proof the county was using another secure system. Given the significant cost of instituting sandboxing techniques individually, most South Carolina local election offices opted to transition their communication with voters to the state supplied .gov accounts. Voter instructions and other supporting ballot materials were modified using these new email addresses.

Rollout Factors Leading to Success in South Carolina

According to Andino, the transition to .gov email addresses was initially met with reluctance from some local officials. That quickly passed when officials understood how easy and cost-effective these changes would be and how much this process would enhance the security of the electronic ballot delivery process. “Resistance to change is natural and rarely is there a perfect time to implement technology changes. Our job at the South Carolina Election Commission was to explain the value of the new technology and make the transition as easy as possible for the local election officials and their voters.” said Andino. “We did just that.”

In South Carolina, the State Election Commission plays an integral role in the conduct of elections at the local level. All local jurisdictions receive the technology infrastructure necessary to conduct an election from the State Election Commission. This structure has facilitated the adoption of secure .gov email accounts throughout the state. Uniform voter registration databases, voting systems and corresponding administrative procedures also have helped minimize the number and type of issues encountered at the local level. Furthermore, the authority of the State Election Commission has helped ensure all South Carolina local election offices, not just a select few, are using secure email accounts.

As of early 2022, the .gov email accounts have been used throughout South Carolina in hundreds of elections without issue. Through leveraging the State Data Center to create these accounts, local election officials in South Carolina have gained access to effective threat detection and mitigation safeguards that would otherwise be too costly for local jurisdictions to implement and troubleshoot.

When authorized by state statute, email remains the most popular electronic ballot return method used by UOCAVA voters. As technology evolves, the cyber threats to the email transmission of ballots increase. Enhanced security measures and risk mitigation strategies are warranted to ensure the secrecy and integrity of a voter’s ballot is preserved. CSG’s work with South Carolina and other states utilizing sandboxing techniques has uniquely positioned OVI to support states as they seek to implement similar solutions. Please reach out if OVI can assist in connecting your office with other states and local election offices who have successfully transitioned to secure email and sandboxing.

*Special acknowledgement to CSG OVI Working Group member and former Director of the South Carolina Election Commission, Marci Andino, for working with the OVI team on this piece, as well as to CSG team member, Rachel Wright.

**For the purposes of this article, forms of electronic ballot return include email, fax, and secure web portal.