29) Analysis of the big government policy of ""counting ballots after election day"

 SPOTM Analysis of “Counting Ballots After Election Day”

Verdict: Misaligned

Allowing ballots to be counted (or even received) after Election Day is generally misaligned with SPOTM principles. Clear, fixed deadlines are essential for election integrity, finality, public confidence, and the orderly transfer of power. Extending the counting process undermines these goals.

Why This Policy Is Misaligned

1. Undermines Finality and Certainty Elections are time-sensitive events that determine the allocation of power. Allowing ballots to arrive or be counted days or weeks after Election Day creates prolonged uncertainty, invites legal challenges, and delays the peaceful transfer of power. SPOTM values ordered liberty and stable institutions.
2. Increases Risk of Fraud and Manipulation Extended deadlines and post-Election Day counting expand the window for irregularities, lost ballots, backdating, or the addition of ballots. The longer the process drags on, the greater the opportunity for abuse and the harder it becomes to maintain a clean chain of custody.
3. Erodes Public Confidence When large numbers of ballots are still being counted days after the election, it fuels suspicion and reduces trust in the results — even if the process is ultimately fair. Legitimate self-government requires not just accurate outcomes but widespread confidence that the process was secure and final.
4. Creates Uneven Playing Fields In some cases, extended counting has allowed one party’s ballots (often mail-in) to be counted later, giving an advantage in close races. This is not a neutral administrative detail — it affects outcomes and perceptions of fairness.
5. Not Necessary for Accessibility Voters can be given ample time to request and return ballots before Election Day. Post-Election Day counting is usually driven by convenience or partisan advantage rather than genuine need.

SPOTM’s Recommended Approach

SPOTM supports clear deadlines and secure, timely counting:

• Strict Election Day Deadline: Ballots must be received by the close of polls on Election Day (with narrow exceptions only for overseas military ballots that were timely postmarked).
• In-Person or Early Voting as Primary: Encourage voting methods that allow same-day or early counting.
• Rapid, Transparent Counting: Complete counting as quickly as possible with bipartisan observers present at every stage.
• No Extended Deadlines: Reject policies that allow ballots received after Election Day to be counted.

SPOTM Summary Statement:

“Counting ballots after Election Day is misaligned because it undermines finality, increases fraud risks, and erodes public confidence in the electoral process. SPOTM supports strict deadlines, timely counting, and secure voting methods that deliver clear, verifiable results on or shortly after Election Day.”

This position flows directly from SPOTM’s commitment to the rule of law, transparency, individual responsibility, and the legitimacy of democratic institutions.

In addition:

Here’s more information on counting ballots after Election Day from a SPOTM perspective.

Legal and Constitutional Context

• Most states have historically required ballots to be received by Election Day (or shortly before) to be counted. Extended deadlines are relatively recent innovations, often driven by pandemic-era changes or partisan efforts.
• The U.S. Constitution gives states primary authority over election administration, but Congress can set rules for federal elections. However, prolonged post-Election Day counting creates practical problems regardless of legality.
• Courts have sometimes allowed post-Election Day counting when laws were unclear, but SPOTM sees this as a symptom of poor legislative design rather than a feature to be encouraged.

The 2020 Experience and Lessons

The large-scale expansion of mail-in voting and extended deadlines in 2020 led to:

• Counting continuing for days or weeks in several key states.
• Significant public confusion and loss of confidence, with many Americans perceiving the process as chaotic or unfair.
• Numerous lawsuits, audits, and reports documenting issues such as late-arriving ballots, signature verification disputes, and chain-of-custody gaps.
• Even where fraud was not proven on a scale that changed the outcome, the perception of vulnerability damaged institutional trust.

SPOTM views this as a clear warning: processes that lack finality invite doubt and division.

Why Finality Matters

• Elections are not just administrative exercises — they are the mechanism by which power is legitimately transferred. Prolonged uncertainty weakens the republic.
• Extended counting increases the risk of “ballot curing,” selective counting, or last-minute additions that can appear to shift results after initial tallies.
• It disadvantages voters who cast ballots on Election Day (in-person) compared to those who mail them in.

SPOTM’s Strong Preference

SPOTM supports clear, strict deadlines:

• Ballots should be received by the close of polls on Election Day (with very limited, verifiable exceptions for overseas military and certain disabled voters).
• Counting should be completed as rapidly as possible with full transparency.
• Any necessary early or absentee voting should have firm pre-Election Day deadlines.

This approach maximizes integrity, finality, and public confidence while still accommodating legitimate needs.

SPOTM Summary:

“Counting ballots after Election Day is misaligned because it undermines finality, increases fraud risks, and erodes trust in the electoral process. SPOTM strongly favors strict Election Day receipt deadlines and rapid, transparent counting to protect the legitimacy of self-government.”

This is consistent with SPOTM’s commitment to the rule of law, individual responsibility, and the stability of democratic institutions.