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.

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.

How did they get my voter information!?: Access and Use of Voter Registration Lists

Breakdown of UOCAVA numbers

There is a difference between general voter information that is readily available to the public in voter registration lists; and sensitive personal information that is protected by numerous safeguards.

The Help America Vote Act of 2002 requires the chief election official of each state to implement a “single, uniform, official, centralized, interactive computerized statewide voter registration list.” This list is to be “defined, maintained, and administered at the State level.”[1] The goal is to allow states to have a computerized list of voters. This allows state and local election officials immediate electronic access to  check the registration status of a voter. It also allows verification of voter information with other state, local and federal agencies; provides a means for list maintenance; and tracks certain appropriate voting histories.

Historically, these lists have been available for campaign purposes. But different states have different requirements for who can request a list of voters and what information that list includes.[2] Additionally, many states have specific Address Confidentiality Programs (ACP) to keep voter information confidential for certain classes of voters, such as victims of domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking. Some examples of state requirements for requesting a voter registration list include:

  • Alaska: Anyone can request a copy of the state voter registration list, which contains the names, addresses and party affiliations of all registered voters in the state. Voters may request in writing to keep their residential address confidential, if they provide a separate mailing address.[3]
  • Colorado: Voter registration lists are available to the public upon request and contain a voter’s full name, address, year of birth, political party and vote history. Information remains private for ACP participants and pre-registrants[4] (a procedure that allows individuals under 18 to register to vote so they are eligible to cast a ballot when they reach 18).
  • Massachusetts: State party committees, statewide candidate committees, state ballot question committees, the jury commissioner, adjutant general and any other individual, agency, or entity that the Secretary of State designates may request the list, which includes names and addresses. Information on ACP participants remains private.[5]
  • Idaho: Any person may request a voter registration list, which include voter name, address and precinct – excluding ACP participants.[6]

Thus far in 2020, there is no evidence that voter registration systems have been penetrated by foreign or domestic actors. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), in conjunction with the FBI, has released a public alert about false claims of hacked voter information. The agencies believe the intention of these claims is to cast doubt of the legitimacy of U.S. elections.[7]

Importantly, that a voter registration system is experiencing an outage does not necessarily mean a voter registration information or other election system has been compromised.[8] In fact, there are many innocuous reasons such errors occur, including configuration errors and natural disasters. [9] Additionally, foreign and domestic cyber actors may make claims they have “hacked” these databases in order to undermine confidence in the November 3 election and U.S. election institutions. In reality, these actors merely have information that is publicly available.

Voter misinformation (false information) and disinformation (false information designed to mislead) campaigns by foreign and domestic actors have been and will continue to be an issue for U.S. election institutions. It is important that federal, state, and local election officials and voters continue to question the veracity of these campaigns and claims. State and local election officials in collaboration with federal agencies, such as CISA, work and train to conduct elections as safely, fairly and securely as possible.


[1] Help Americans Vote Act §303(a)(1)(A0(i)-§303(a)(1)(A)(viii)

[2] Access To and Use of Voter Registration Lists, National Conference of State Legislatures https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/access-to-and-use-of-voter-registration-lists.aspx

[3] AS §15.07.127 and §15.07.195

[4] Colo. Rev. Stat. §1-2-302, §24-30-2108, §1-2-227

[5] Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 51 §47C, §37, §44

[6] Idaho Code §34-437, §34-437A, §19-5706

[7] False Claims of Hacked Voter Information Likely Intended to Cast Doubt on Legitimacy of U.S. Elections https://www.cisa.gov/publication/false-claims-hacked-voter-information-likely-intended-cast-doubt-legitimacy-us

[8] See CISA Cyber Threats to Voting Processes Could Slow but Not Prevent Voting, https://www.cisa.gov/publication/cyber-threats-voting-processes-could-slow-not-prevent-voting

[9] CISA #Protect2020 Rumor vs. Reality https://www.cisa.gov/rumorcontrol

Voter Registration Modernization in Colorado: Implications for UOCAVA voters and the EAVS Section B Data Standard Pilot

benefits of the ESB data standard

The ESB Data Standard Roundtrip Pilot

In June 2020, The Council of State Governments (CSG) Overseas Voting Initiative launched the first Elections Administration Voting Survey, Section B (ESB) Data Standard Pilot. Throughout the course of the pilot, election officials in three states — California, Colorado and Washington — will work closely with Overseas Voting Initiative staff to fully implement the ESB Data Standard in their local jurisdictions by March 2021.

Achieving full implementation will require election officials to develop an in-depth understanding of the standard’s conventions as well as the actions necessary to conform their jurisdiction’s existing data to the standard. The diversity among state processes of collecting and storing election data will bring about unique challenges as officials attempt to do so. These challenges may stem from jurisdictional variation in date formats, capitalization (e.g. some values entered as “mail” others as “Mail”) or country names (e.g. some entries spell out “Cote D’Ivoire” while others “Ivory Coast”), among others.

Colorado’s Progress Toward Full Implementation of the ESB Data Standard

Of the pilot’s participants, the Colorado Elections Division has uniquely positioned itself to overcome these challenges and fully implement the ESB Data Standard by March. This stems from the division’s previous involvement with the Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP) EAVS Section B Working Group as well as its efforts to modernize the state voter registration system.

In 2015, FVAP created the EAVS Section B Working Group. This group consisted of state and local election officials experienced in Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) voting who sought to both reduce the burden of EAVS, Section B reporting and enhance its overall utility. Among the Working Group’s 13 members was Hilary Rudy, Colorado deputy director of elections.

Not only was Rudy a staunch advocate of adopting the ESB Data Standard, but she was also among the first to implement the standard in her state’s election jurisdictions.* By 2018, election officials had not only established internal procedures for conforming EAVS Section B data to the standard but had also begun standardizing voters’ country codes and names according to United States Postal Service (USPS) guidelines.

Although the ESB Data Standard requires physical addresses to be formatted according to ISO 3166, Colorado’s adoption of USPS standards significantly reduces the time and effort necessary to ensure the validity of UOCAVA voters’ country data. This has, in part, allowed the state’s Elections Division to supply the CSG Overseas Voting Initiative with its first set of ESB standard-compliant data within one month of the pilot’s kickoff. As of late August 2020, this data set had passed one of two validations necessary to ensure its accuracy and validity.

Benefits of Colorado’s Address Standardization Beyond the ESB Data Standard

Colorado’s voter address standardization was initially intended to facilitate implementation of the ESB Data Standard; however, the benefits of this work have extended much further. According to Rudy, both election officials and UOCAVA voters alike have experienced significant improvements in the voting process as a result of these efforts.

Prior to standardization, the ability of local election officials to conduct outreach to UOCAVA voters was limited. If valid, active addresses could not be derived from a voter’s state records, the likelihood of an election official to successfully contact an overseas voter was slim. Upon adopting USPS address standards, the success rate of this outreach improved significantly.

With the threat of U.S. withdrawal from the Universal Postal Union in 2018 and the onset of the coronavirus pandemic in 2020, the ability of local election officials to acquire additional contact information became increasingly important. Upon obtaining this information, Colorado election officials would not only be able to successfully inform voters of any international mail delays, but also educate them on alternative voting options. Contingency plans could then be developed to help prevent disenfranchisement.

Through the Election Division’s outreach to overseas voters, Rudy and her colleagues also found that former UOCAVA voters often failed to update their registration status upon returning stateside.** In response, the Elections Division was able to add a checkbox to various state forms allowing these voters to indicate a change in their registration status. This addition has improved Colorado’s overall voter registration system as well as the accuracy of their EAVS Section B data.

Despite the demands of a tumultuous election year, Rudy and her colleagues have continued to prioritize the standardization of the voter registration system and the improvement of the overall voting experience in Colorado. Not only has the Elections Division successfully incorporated country name dropdown boxes into its online voter registration system, but it has also developed Colorado’s first statewide ballot tracking system. Officials anticipate full implementation of this system by the end of the year. Through these efforts, the Elections Division has demonstrated their commitment to both strengthening the state’s voting system and fostering confidence in its efficacy.


*For further information on the successes and impacts of these efforts, read FVAP’s 2018 research note Data Standardization and the Impact of Ballot Transmission Timing and Mode on UOCAVA Voting.

**For more information about the conduct of elections in Colorado, please visit https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/main.html