The news these days is filled with contradictory opinions about mail-in voting. President Donald Trump asserts the perils to security and dependability. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi charges the president with hamstringing the postal service and limiting its capacity to deliver mail. Panic prevails. Fears abound that Social Security and veterans’ checks will not be delivered in a timely manner. Meanwhile, the president ensures the nation that any recent changes to the postal service by its new director will not adversely affect these items or the mail generally. Who is right?

Noam Chomsky once wrote, "The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.” That appears to be what is happening now. The debate continues and the media seem uninterested in examining alternative voting methods or even checking the facts.

Fact one: The U.S. Postal Service has sufficient capacity at present to manage all election ballots and to see them delivered in plenty of time. Dana Coletti, the president of the American Postal Workers Union in New Hampshire, told Ink Link, “The narrative they’re trying to spell out in the media is nonsense … Every Christmas we process approximately half a billion pieces of mail … [This election] is a fraction of that.”

Fact two: While the press has consistently disparaged the president’s comments about fraud connected with mail-in ballots, there is some truth to the statement. According to both Washington Monthly and The New York Times, an analysis of 2,490 votes found that Florida accepted 680 questionable votes — either from ballots without postmarks or postmarked after Election Day, and even ballots from voters who voted twice. George W. Bush ultimately won the Florida contest by 537 votes. When President Trump speaks of the possibility of fraud in mailed ballots, he may have a point historically. 

Fact three: The coronavirus has put mail-in ballots from overseas at risk. Many countries are not sending or processing mail from the United States in a timely fashion because of canceled international flights, staff limitations or other issues. Millions of ballots cast by overseas voters may not be counted since they will not arrive in time.

U.S. voters in Mexico: This is of special concern to expats living in Mexico. Most U.S. states that have mail-in absentee ballots for registered voters living and working overseas require that you fill out a form and send it to the local board of canvassers or a federal clearinghouse, which will forward the request. That office, in turn, will mail the ballot. The problem is, Mexican mail delivery to the United States is either suspended due to the pandemic or limited by a shortage of personnel. The only secure way to send mail to the United States is via FedEx, which costs 950 pesos (about $45). The request and subsequent return of the completed ballots would cost almost $100. Even so, it is not guaranteed the ballots would arrive in time to be filled out. 

Most of us have still not received our coronavirus stimulus checks of $1,200, which were supposedly mailed May 1. Assuming a similar delay in the receipt of our ballots, it is unlikely we would receive our ballots before the deadline, let alone have them arrive at our Rhode Island Board of Canvassers in time for the election.

The alternative: Electronic voting is a logical, practical and efficient option. Few people use snail mail these days. Most have iPads or cell phones. Electronic ballots are used throughout the developed world with success. However, in the United States, they are currently accepted only in a few states (Alaska, Hawaii, Louisiana, Utah and District of Columbia), and limited to military or overseas voters. It would be easy for other states to adopt electronic voting and extend it not only to all overseas voters but to domestic voters as well. It is time for a 21st-century solution, not an 18th-century one, and an end to partisan complaints and futile arguments.