The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a dramatic increase in the number of Americans who choose to vote by mail. For instance, North Carolina election officials expect 10 times the usual number of voters to cast their ballots by mail.

Absentee voting is an important option to protect the right to vote for those who are sick or afraid to vote in person due to COVID-19. However, voting by mail is not only more susceptible to fraud but threatens to disenfranchise voters who never receive their ballots or inadvertently complete their ballot incorrectly.

On Monday, RNLA’s Co-Chair Harmeet Dhillon published an op-ed in USA TODAY about the risks that widespread vote-by-mail poses in the upcoming election. Currently, she is representing Republicans in California suing to prevent absentee ballots from being sent to inactive voters. Absentee voting plays an important role in the electoral process for those who are unable to vote in person. However, Democrats are pushing for universal vote-by-mail despite the warnings of election experts on both sides of the aisle.

While the mainstream media denies the very existence of vote fraud, local newspapers have been noting election fraud and problems that have escaped the notice of the DC-based pundits. 

First off we’ll start with the swing state of Pennsylvania.  Pennsylvania is experiencing an increase in vote by mail and is already challenged by it.  The first problem is voters are receiving duplicate ballots and no one knows who or how many.    

It is not clear how many voters have received duplicate ballots, or for how long the problem persisted. A county spokeswoman said there was "no way to know" the scope of the problem.  In a Friday call with reporters, county Elections Manager Dave Voye agreed: "We don’t have a full scope of how many were mailed," he said, later adding that the county was unlikely to obtain one. He said the county had determined the issue began in late April, and was addressed earlier this week. . . .

A 2019 change in state law made voting by mail far easier – and the coronavirus has made it incredibly popular. Jeff Greenburg, who manages elections in Mercer County, told WESA earlier this month that the SURE system was “part of the bottleneck” that elections workers faced in dealing with an influx of mail-in requests. Counties have a limited number of terminals with access to the system, and a limited number of staff to verify voter information from people receiving the ballots. He worried that a crush of last-minute ballot applications would further strain the system. . . .

Asked whether he expected conservative groups to use the snafu in an effort to cast aspersions on the voting process, DeMarco said, “I think it’s within anyone’s rights to start asking question. When you think about how important our elections are, and we tell everyone who safe mail-in ballots are, and then people are getting ballots they didn’t even ask for."

While reasonable people can disagree about how elections should be changed in response to the unique challenges of COVID-19, there should be universal agreement not to make them more dangerous and less effective.  Yet that is what the left and California are trying to do.

Hillary Clinton's 2016 lawyer and Steele dossier funder Marc Elias has made ballot harvesting one of his four pillars for election reform.  As Logan Churchwell explains in an op-ed entitled, All-mail ballot harvesters could be the next COVID-19 superspreaders:

Picture a harvester in a densely-populated city visiting dozens of houses and apartments each day — often crossing thresholds into living rooms to promote a particular candidate, cause or party. Think of the air they breathe, the touched surfaces and the collected ballot envelopes sealed with human saliva from each home. It only takes one untested, asymptomatic COVID-19 carrier’s ballot being harvested to risk exposure for the rest of the neighborhood as that political operative continues door-to-door.

Proponents have a tough sell in credibly convincing the public that all-mail ballot elections are actually safer with respect to sanitary concerns.