Bill Overview
Title: Clean Elections in America Act
Description: This bill prohibits states from providing individuals with absentee ballots to vote in federal elections unless they meet specified application requirements and are unable to vote in person due to specified reasons.
Sponsors: Rep. Grothman, Glenn [R-WI-6]
Target Audience
Population: People who vote in US federal elections
Estimated Size: 60000000
- The bill affects voters in federal elections, which includes elections for the President, Senate, and House of Representatives.
- Absentee ballots are popular among people with disabilities, the elderly, and those who travel or live outside their voting jurisdiction.
- The bill targets the mechanics of absentee voting, potentially affecting millions who rely on absentee voting for convenience or necessity.
- In the US, the federal voting age population is over 250 million people as of 2023.
- Historically, around 20 to 25% of voters use absentee ballots in federal elections, though this number can vary significantly due to factors such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
- The percentage of absentee ballot users who will be impacted by the limitations in the bill depends mainly on the stringency of the 'specified application requirements' and 'specified reasons' outlined in the bill.
Reasoning
- The policy affects a significant portion of voters who use absentee ballots. These include people with disabilities, the elderly, military personnel, and individuals living abroad.
- Given historical data, about 25% of voters use absentee ballots, which means the policy has the potential to impact around 60 million voters severely depending on how stringent the application requirements are.
- The policy is restricted by a budget which implies a focused or phased implementation strategy, potentially limiting immediate widespread impact.
- Those who have multiple means of accessing voting methods may be less affected, while those reliant solely on absentee voting will be most affected.
Simulated Interviews
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I value the convenience of absentee ballots since my work requires a lot of travel.
- If the new policy restricts my ability to vote absentee, it would be frustrating.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 8 |
Military Officer (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could make it harder for me to vote while deployed.
- I hope the policy includes provisions for military personnel like me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 9 |
Retired (Miami, FL)
Age: 72 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've only voted absentee for the past decade due to my health.
- This policy might make it much harder for people like me to vote.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 6 |
Freelancer (New York, NY)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I tend to work different gigs that require me to travel.
- If this policy limits absentee voting, it might complicate my ability to vote regularly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 7 |
Healthcare Worker (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Voting absentee helps me manage my hectic schedule.
- I worry that more restrictions could make voting more stressful.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 8 |
Professor (Denver, CO)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The ease of absentee voting lets me engage in global academic events without missing elections.
- Restrictive policies might decrease my participation in voting.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 9 |
Entrepreneur (Seattle, WA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Absentee voting allows me to prioritize both business and civic duties.
- The policy might overcomplicate my already packed schedule.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Retired (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 67 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I rely on absentee voting to participate in elections.
- Changing the rules could mean some seniors won't be able to vote.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 5 |
Graduate Student (Boston, MA)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I fear the policy could limit my ability to vote while I'm abroad.
- Access to absentee voting is a crucial part of my civic engagement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 7 |
Farmer (Rural Nebraska)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I depend on absentee voting due to my farming schedule.
- This new policy could make balancing work and voting tough.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $30000000)
Year 2: $19000000 (Low: $9000000, High: $28000000)
Year 3: $18000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $27000000)
Year 5: $17000000 (Low: $7000000, High: $26000000)
Year 10: $15000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $25000000)
Year 100: $10000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $15000000)
Key Considerations
- The bill's ultimate fiscal impact is highly dependent on the administrative efficiency and effectiveness of state implementations.
- Short-term costs are expected to be higher due to initial set-up and transition efforts.
- The extent to which absentee ballots are reduced will visually align with savings across related material and processing costs.
- The number of people applying for absentee ballots under the new policy could still be considerable, maintaining some level of cost despite reductions.