Legislative initiatives
Developing model legislation to ensure accessible absentee and early voting options for all eligible citizens.
This evergreen analysis outlines essential steps, stakeholder roles, constitutional considerations, practical design choices, and safeguards necessary to craft durable, inclusive, and simple absentee and early voting statutes that withstand political shifts while expanding access for every eligible citizen.
Published by
Jessica Lewis
July 19, 2025 - 3 min Read
In designing a robust framework for absentee and early voting, legislators must first anchor the process in principles of accessibility, security, and transparency. Accessibility means removing practical barriers such as complex registration requirements, limited polling locations, and rigid deadlines that disenfranchise busy workers, students, caregivers, and people with disabilities. Security entails rigorous verification, tamper-evident ballots, and robust chain-of-custody procedures to maintain public confidence. Transparency requires clear communication about eligibility, timelines, and remedies for disputes. A durable model statute should codify these values while allowing adaptations to state contexts. Importantly, it should preserve the integrity of elections without creating unnecessary administrative burdens that deter participation.
A thoughtful statute begins with universal eligibility for absentee and early voting, while maintaining reasonable safeguards. Language should specify that any citizen meeting baseline criteria—such as age and residency—has a right to request an absentee ballot without punitive or arbitrary obstacles. The design should include multiple channels to request ballots, including online portals, mail, and in-person assistance, with options to accommodate limited internet access. Provisions must ensure timely delivery of ballots, accurate voter rolls, and dependable notification systems. To prevent fraud or confusion, the statute can authorize verification steps that balance privacy with accountability, such as secure authentication and nonintrusive identity checks that avoid gatekeeping on unintended grounds.
Equitable access requires clear processes and reliable support systems.
One cornerstone is simplifying the ballot access pathway. The model statute should standardize forms, deadlines, and verification steps to minimize confusion and mistakes. It should also standardize the process for curing missing signatures or incorrect information, offering residents a clear, user-friendly route to rectify errors before deadlines. By adopting uniform procedures across jurisdictions, voters experience consistency, which reduces procedural barriers and increases confidence. Additionally, the statute should encourage accessibility by requiring alternative formats, such as large-print ballots and assistive technologies, ensuring individuals with disabilities can participate fully. Clear, accessible guidance must accompany every communication about deadlines and methods.
A second priority is infrastructure for timely communication. The model should mandate proactive outreach during registration and election cycles, including multilingual resources, plain-language explanations, and real-time status updates. Systems should provide reminders about upcoming deadlines via multiple channels—email, text, mail, and phone—so individuals can plan accordingly. It is essential to include robust support hotlines staffed by trained personnel who can answer questions about eligibility, deadlines, and submission methods. When people feel informed and supported, their trust in the process grows, translating into higher participation rates and decreased incidence of incomplete submissions that invalidate ballots.
Inclusion of rural and vulnerable communities enhances democratic participation.
Beyond accessibility and communication, security and privacy must be embedded in every provision. The model statute should define transparent, auditable procedures for ballot handling, custody, and return. Requirements might include sealed envelopes, tamper-evident seals, and secure drop boxes with monitored access. The statute should also articulate data protection measures—limiting collection to essential information, securing databases, and enforcing strict access controls. Privacy protections reassure voters that their ballots are confidential and safe from external pressures. Finally, there should be explicit remedies for violations, including penalties and avenues for redress, to deter misconduct and maintain public trust.
Alongside security, the statute must address accessibility for remote or rural communities where physical polling places are scarce. Provisions can authorize expanded access through centralized processing centers, mobile voting teams, or authorized trusted agents who may assist voters with the process in a compliant manner. The model should set reasonable travel and processing times, ensuring that people in remote areas are not penalized for their location. Funding mechanisms—state grants or federal supplements—can support these arrangements, ensuring that cost considerations do not become a barrier to participation. Importantly, oversight bodies must monitor implementation to identify gaps and respond promptly.
Alignment with existing structures ensures smooth implementation.
A core element is the thoughtful treatment of deadlines and cure provisions. The statute should specify clear, nonretroactive deadlines for request submissions, ballot returns, and cure processes. It should also accommodate extensions in cases of natural disasters, public health emergencies, or credible disruptions to mail and delivery services. The cure process—allowing voters to fix issues with ballots—must be straightforward, with explicit timelines and accessible guidance. By codifying predictable remedies, states reduce the risk of disenfranchisement due to administrative failures. This predictability helps voters plan, adapt, and participate despite external challenges that might otherwise deter engagement.
Another crucial aspect is the alignment with existing election laws and organizational structures. The model should integrate with current voter registration processes, ensuring a smooth transition rather than a disruptive overhaul. It should define roles for election officials, clerks, and poll workers in managing absentee and early voting workflows, clarifying responsibilities and accountability mechanisms. Interoperability with county or municipal systems is essential to avoid data silos and ensure accurate voter information and ballot tracking. Clear standing orders, training requirements, and performance metrics contribute to consistency and reliability across jurisdictions.
Oversight and continuous improvement sustain legitimacy and access.
Public information campaigns are indispensable to success. The model statute should mandate ongoing education about absentee and early voting options, including how to request ballots, where to return them, and what to do if problems arise. Campaigns should be culturally responsive and accessible, featuring community organizations, schools, libraries, and employers in outreach efforts. Providing sample materials, FAQs, and decision aids helps voters choose the most suitable voting option without confusion. Transparent cost information and resource allocation must be disclosed, allowing communities to see how funds are spent to support accessibility, security, and outreach.
Safeguards against manipulation and fatigue are necessary to preserve legitimacy. The model should establish independent audits of absentee and early voting processes, with random sampling and public reporting. It should prohibit discriminatory practices, such as singling out specific groups for stricter requirements, while maintaining robust verification measures. Training for election personnel should emphasize neutrality, conflict resolution, and data privacy. Regular reviews can capture evolving threats and adapt procedures accordingly, preserving the integrity of the system while expanding access for eligible voters. These protections help preserve public confidence across generations and political cycles.
Finally, the model legislation must contemplate fiscal sustainability. Budgets should account for the full cycle of absentee and early voting—from staffing to technology, precinct operations, and outreach—ensuring long-term viability. A well-designed statute anticipates future needs by allocating funds for updates to registration databases, ballot printing, secure transport, and accessibility accommodations. It should also create predictable funding streams to prevent abrupt reductions in services during economic downturns. Transparent reporting on expenditures and performance outcomes supports responsible stewardship and public accountability, encouraging ongoing support from lawmakers and communities who benefit from easier participation.
To maximize impact, the model should encourage state-specific tailoring within a principled framework. It can offer baseline standards while permitting jurisdictions to adopt enhancements suited to local demographics and geography. Pilot programs can test innovations in a controlled setting before scaling, accompanied by evaluation metrics and public feedback channels. Collaboration with civil society, disability advocates, veterans groups, student associations, and labor organizations can help align policy with real-world needs. The result is a durable, adaptable statute that broadens access, preserves security, and sustains trust in democracy through inclusive absentee and early voting options.
