Pennsylvania: Chester County commissioners vote to count challenged provisional ballots after poll book error | Katie Bernard/The Philadelphia Inquirer

The Chester County Board of Elections rejected Republican challenges to provisional ballots Monday as the board prepares to launch an investigation into a poll book error that forced thousands of independent and third-party voters to cast provisional ballots during this month’s election. In a nearly six-hour meeting, the Democratic-led board heard from dozens of voters and poll workers who described the chaos they endured on Nov. 4 during the high-turnout municipal election. The election resulted in more than 12,000 provisional ballots being cast primarily by independent and third-party voters blocked from voting on machines — an unusually high amount. Read Article

Pennsylvania’s Chester County seeks explanation for pollbook error as it checks provisional ballots | Carter Walker/Votebeat

Pennsylvania’s Chester County has reviewed more than two-thirds of the provisional ballots cast on Election Day, and confirmed that it has begun counting eligible ballots, though officials still cannot explain what caused a pollbook error that forced independent and third-party voters to use provisional ballots. County officials said they hope to have the answer by December, after an investigation by an outside firm. Pollbooks are the lists of registered voters that workers use to check in voters at the polling place. But pollbooks that Chester County distributed for Election Day omitted third-party and independent voters, forcing thousands of them to vote using provisional ballots. Provisional ballots require voters and election officials to take some additional steps, such as signing the envelope in the correct spot, or they will be rejected for technical reasons, and the ballots must undergo additional checks before they are counted. Read Article

Pennsylvania: What happened with Chester County’s pollbook printing problem? | Carter Walker/Votebeat

An error that affected the ability of tens of thousands of Chester County voters to cast regular ballots on Election Day happened after county officials mistakenly failed to extract third party and unaffiliated voters from the state’s voter registration management database when creating a pollbook file for printing. State officials say the county only extracted Republican and Democrat voters when the county prepared its pollbooks, leaving out the third party and unaffiliated voters. Pollbooks are lists of registered voters that workers use to check them in at voting locations. “That is something that you sometimes see counties do, correctly, in a primary election,” Secretary of the Commonwealth Al Schmidt said, referring to the fact that third party and unaffiliated voters can’t participate in Pennsylvania primaries. “It appears that Chester did that pollbook extract and only included major party voters.” Read Article

Pennsylvania criminal case highlights problems with third-party voter registration drives | Carter Walker/Votebeat

In the lead-up to the 2024 presidential election, workers with an Arizona-based consulting firm conducting a voter registration drive tried to submit fake registrations in Pennsylvania in an effort to earn more money, the state attorney general is alleging in a criminal complaint filed this month. The case grew out of investigations in a few counties into voter registration applications that prosecutors had flagged as irregular before the election. But election officials across the commonwealth say the problems with these types of third-party voter registration drives aren’t limited to this incident of alleged fraud. Rather, they say, systemic problems with the way third-party voter registration organizations operate often result in street canvassers submitting incomplete or invalid registrations. Read Article

Pennsylvania: Five years after trying to aid Trump, Fulton County faces steep penalty | Carter Walker/Votebeat

After President Donald Trump lost his reelection bid in 2020, he and his allies were pushing false narratives about the election being stolen, pressuring state and local officials, and calling for audits of the results. In Fulton County, Pennsylvania, a Republican stronghold where Trump won a larger percentage of the vote than anywhere else in the state, local leaders wanted to help. “Sending this email to see what’s going on with this rigged election,” County Commissioner Randy Bunch, a Republican, wrote to state Sen. Judy Ward, also a Republican, in a Nov. 12 email obtained by watchdog group American Oversight. “We can’t let this election get stolen if there is anything I can do please let me know.” A few weeks later, according to court documents, the county let an outside company examine its voting machines and download data from them. In text messages sent shortly afterwards, one county commissioner said that if the county hadn’t given the company access, a Trump ally would have forced it to do so via a subpoena. That decision to allow a third party to access sensitive voting equipment set off far-reaching consequences for Fulton County. As a result of a state order, it had to purchase all-new voting equipment. After years of legal proceedings, the county is facing more than $1 million in fines, an amount equal to roughly one-eighth of the county’s yearly budget. Read Article

Pennsylvania counties erroneously issue dozens of duplicate ballots | Carter Walker/Votebeat

A handful of Pennsylvania counties mistakenly issued duplicate mail ballots to a few of their voters in recent weeks. Why that happened is unclear — state and county officials gave different explanations — but they cautioned that the error would have not resulted in anyone being able to have their vote counted twice. State and county officials said they have found that a total of 68 potential duplicate mail ballots were mistakenly issued. In some of these cases, they said, the ballots may not have reached voters, as the mistake may have been caught after a second ballot label was generated but before a duplicate ballot was actually mailed to the voter. Read Article

Pennsylvania: Luzerne County, state disagree on cause of ballot release error | Michael P. Buffer/The Citizens’ Voice

Luzerne County and the Pennsylvania Department of State offered different assessments of what caused the release of two mail ballots to 31 voters for the Nov. 4 general election. According to a statement from the Department of State, Luzerne County “inadvertently and incorrectly generated duplicate mailing labels.” Luzerne County Director of Elections Emily Cook noted “an apparent error with the state’s SURE system” in a news release on Tuesday that disclosed the inadvertent and “isolated” release of two mail ballots to 31 voters. The Statewide Uniform Registry of Electors (SURE) system serves as the database for the state’s 67 counties to ensure the accuracy and integrity of voter registration rolls. It allows counties to update voters’ registration information statewide, eliminate verified duplicates and deceased voters from the rolls and transfer records electronically between counties. Read Article

Pennsylvania Supreme Court rule that soters must be told if mail ballot is rejected, | Carter Walker/Votebeat

Voters must be notified if election officials are going to reject their mail ballots because of an error such as an incorrect date or missing signature on the return envelope, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled Friday. In a 4-3 decision, the court ruled that Washington County erred in not notifying 2024 presidential primary voters that their mail ballots would be rejected, leaving them unaware their votes would go uncounted. “We must interpret the Election Code and its statutory procedures in a way that ‘favors the fundamental right to vote and enfranchises, rather than disenfranchises, the electorate,’ Justice Kevin Dougherty said, writing for the majority. “Reading the Code as allowing county boards to withhold readily available information from voters does not serve that goal.” V–read Article

Pennsylvania: Fight over mail-ballot date requirement approaches the endgame – Carter Walker/Votebeat

When Pennsylvania’s highest court gathered in Philadelphia on Sept. 10 to hear arguments on whether voters must write the date on their mail ballot return envelopes, a lawyer for Republican groups told justices that eliminating the requirement could prompt a flood of election law challenges. It’s probably a little late to worry about that. Election litigation hit unprecedented heights across the country during the 2024 election cycle, according to an expert who tracks it, a sign that courts are increasingly being asked to settle partisan battles over election administration. And Pennsylvania’s mail ballot dating requirement could very well be the most litigated of all. Read Article

Pennsylvania: What to know about the poll worker positions on the 2025 election ballot | Carter Walker/Votebeat

More than 27,000 poll worker positions will be on ballots across Pennsylvania this November, allowing voters to select who will be in charge of their precincts during the 2026 and 2028 election cycles. Only Pennsylvanians are voting for these positions. No other state still elects its poll workers, and these contests are usually riddled with vacancies. That makes elections for poll workers more complicated than most. Read Article

Pennsylvania: A federal appeals court affirmed state can’t throw out misdated mail ballots. What could happen next? | Lindsay Shachnow/Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

In Pennsylvania, absentee and mail ballots must be received by county elections offices by 8 p.m. on Election Day. So requiring voters to date their ballots didn’t seem to serve much of a purpose, said Justin Levitt, an election law expert and law professor at Loyola Marymount University’s Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. “Why are you throwing out something as important as somebody’s vote for something that isn’t important at all?” he said. “It’s like throwing somebody’s ballot out if they use black pen rather than blue pen.” Last week, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed. The federal court ordered Pennsylvania to stop throwing out mail ballots that are incorrectly dated by voters, affirming earlier court rulings. But the legal fight is unlikely to end there. Read Article

Pennsylvania nuns who stood up to claims of election fraud win national award | Carter Walker/Votebeat

As the 2024 presidential election approached, tensions were high, and activists were, once again, hunting for fraud. Cliff Maloney, a Republican activist working to get GOP voters to return their mail ballots, said on the social network X that one of his door-to-door canvassers had discovered an address in Erie, Pennsylvania, that had no residents but 53 voters registered to it. “Turns out it’s the Benedictine Sisters of Erie and NO ONE lives there,” he wrote in a post that went viral, adding that he would not let “Dems count illegal votes.” But that wasn’t true. And Maloney found himself being called out by the nuns, who didn’t appreciate being accused of fraud. “We do live at Mount Saint Benedict Monastery and a simple web search would alert him to our active presence in a number of ministries in Erie,” Sister Stephanie Schmidt, of the Benedictine Sisters of Erie, said in a statement, calling Maloney’s post “blatantly false.” Read Article

Pennsylvania Congressional Republicans say election powers should remain with states | Jordan Wilkie/WITF

Three Republican members of Congress from Pennsylvania said Tuesday that President Donald Trump’s recent statement that he wants to eliminate voting machines and mail-in ballots is theoretically appealing but impractical, as elections are managed by the 50 states, not the president. Asked about Trump’s comments on Tuesday, U.S. Senator Dave McCormick didn’t criticize the president. But he made the point that mobilizing more Republicans to vote by mail last year helped him and Trump both win in Pennsylvania. Two fellow Republicans who were in McCormick’s company, Congressmen Lloyd Smucker and Scott Perry, said election rules are generally left up to the states. Read Article

Pennsylvania voter ID proposal may not prevent most ballot fraud | Carter Walker/Votebeat

Stricter voter ID requirements would likely not have prevented people from casting fraudulent ballots in the vast majority of cases charged in Pennsylvania over the past decade, a Votebeat and Spotlight PA analysis shows. Over the 10 years, the organizations found 14 instances in which law enforcement or election officials say at least one fraudulent ballot was cast. The analysis is based on Pennsylvania court system data on election crimes charged between July 2015 and July 2025, and additional reports identified by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. The organizations then cross-checked this data with news reports and charging documents to determine whether any fraudulent ballots were cast. Read Article

Pennsylvania: Justice Department wants more voter and election information from Pa. officials | Tirzah Christopher/PennLive

The Department of Justice has sent a second letter to the Pennsylvania Department of State requesting records on voters, election officials and duplicate voting. The letter, dated Aug. 3, which requested a list of all state and local election officials responsible for maintaining voter registration lists from November 2022 through the date the letter was received. The agency also asked for more information on the state’s efforts to combat duplicate voting as well as voter registration history for all voters categorized as noncitizens, “adjudicated incompetent,” or who had a felony conviction during the same period. Read Article

Pennsylvania voters are rarely hampered by malfunctioning machines, reports show | Carter Walker/Votebeat

Pennsylvania voters encountered only scattered voting-machine malfunctions that rarely affected their ability to cast ballots in recent elections, according to a Votebeat and Spotlight PA analysis of problems reported to the state. Counties reported a smattering of common problems with machines at polling places, such as paper jams and error messages. They typically got such issues fixed quickly by having technicians on call or simply replacing the machine. For election officials, sending out a technician or staffer to a polling place is usually easier and more efficient than trying to walk a poll worker through a fix over the phone, said Forrest Lehman, election director in Lycoming County. Officials refer to these traveling helpers as rovers or roamers. Read Article

Pennsylvania redesigns provisional-ballot envelope to help cut rejections | Carter Walker/Votebeat

Pennsylvania election officials on Monday announced a redesigned provisional-ballot envelope that they hope will lead to fewer ballots being rejected for technical errors. “Improvements to envelope design might seem like a small thing, but it has a huge impact on the ability for Pennsylvanians across the commonwealth to have their votes counted,” said Seth Bluestein, a Republican city commissioner for Philadelphia, which worked with the Department of State on the new design. Philadelphia plans to use the new design in its November municipal elections. The state also consulted election officials from Berks, Greene, Butler, and Mercer counties. Read Article

Pennsylvania: Department of Justice presses for answers on how it manages voter rolls | Carter Walker/Spotlight PA

The U.S. Department of Justice is asking Pennsylvania for a wide range of information on how it manages voter registration and voter rolls, as part of what it calls “nationwide efforts” to monitor compliance with a key federal voting statute. In a June 23 letter to Pennsylvania Secretary of the Commonwealth Al Schmidt, the department asked for 14 categories of information on the state’s voter registration activities, including how voters are added to and removed from the voter rolls, and how the state prevents unauthorized access to its system. The letter is the latest in a series of requests the Civil Rights Division has sent to states involving their compliance with federal voting statutes. This one specifically cites the Help America Vote Act, or HAVA, a 2002 law that overhauled voter registration and election administration. Read Article

Pennsylvania House unanimously passes bill to crack down on deepfakes in politi | Jaxon White/WITF

House lawmakers Monday approved legislation to combat artificial intelligence that is used to mislead voters by impersonating political candidates. The bill, passed in a unanimous vote, would require campaigns to disclose when they use AI-generated deepfakes that mimic a candidate’s appearance or voice. Under the bill, political campaigns and organizations that do not disclose their use of a deepfake in an advertisement could be fined every day the ad runs. That daily fine would be up to $15,000 in municipal elections, $50,000 in state elections and $250,000 in federal elections. Read Article

Pennsylvania election officials bring wish lists to Duquesne forum | Carter Walker/Votebeat

Yes, counties still need more time before Election Day to process mail ballots. And while you’re at it, Harrisburg, please adjust the deadlines for voters applying for mail ballots. County election officials brought their wish lists to a panel moderated by Votebeat Pennsylvania reporter Carter Walker at the Thomas R. Kline School of Law of Duquesne University Monday. The event was hosted by Keep Our Republic, a nonpartisan nonprofit whose mission is strengthening elections. The panelists were Chet Harhut, deputy manager of the Allegheny County Elections Division; Sherene Hess, Indiana County commissioner and board president of the County Commissioners Association of Pennsylvania; and Melanie Ostrander, Washington County elections director. Read Article

Pennsylvania improves election data transparency, with more upgrades to come | Jordan Wilkie/WITF

Pennsylvania’s election data is easier to access and interpret than it’s ever been, with more changes in the works to improve transparency, the state’s top election administrator said last week. The state has sold the ability to download bulk data on every voter in the state for $20, including vote history, party registration, voter age and more, but the files are convoluted and hard to handle. Downloading the statewide voter registration file and gaining any meaningful insight from it requires computer programming savvy and knowledge of county-by-county election administration. To make it easier for people to understand the data, the Department of State rolled out new data dashboards in late May. One covers 2024 general election vote history and registration. The other shows data on mail-in ballots. Read Article

Pennsylvania Senate committee advancing election bills, starting small | Jordan Wilkie/WITF

Any effort to update Pennsylvania’s elections law is going to run through state Sen. Cris Dush’s State Government Committee. No matter what changes House Democrats pass, they are going to need some buy-in from the Jefferson County Republican. Dush’s committee has not reviewed any major election issues this session, including the omnibus election reform bill passed on a party line vote in the House in May. Next up for the Senate State Government Committee is a technical bill to bar voting systems from including voter selections in a barcode as part of a printed ballot card. Read Article

Pennsylvania tallies up votes for poll workers, amid shortage of candidates | Carter Walker/Votebeat

Pennsylvania voters went to the polls last week to help carry on a centuries-old practice that no other state does: elections to choose their election workers. “It was a great idea in the 1800s that they never got rid of,” said Thad Hall, Mercer County’s election director, who just oversaw a primary to select the Democratic and Republican candidates for more than 150 poll worker positions. Counties are still finalizing the results from the May 20 election. The counting includes the slow process of tabulating write-in votes, as many races don’t have candidates listed on the ballot. In Mercer County, roughly 50% of the positions did not have a nominated candidate, Hall said, and he suspects “a lot” of his open positions won’t have a candidate on the ballot in November, either. Read Article

Pennsylvania: A failed plot to steal a local election shows how hard it is to pull off fraud | Carter Walker/Spotlight PA

In October 2021, shortly before Election Day, Mahabubul Tayub was reviewing the voter rolls for the tiny Philadelphia suburb of Millbourne, where he was on the ballot as a candidate for mayor. Something didn’t seem right. Dozens of new voters had been registered in recent weeks, he noticed, including some people he knew — people who didn’t live in Millbourne. Tayub won the mayoral election that November, but it would take years for authorities to fully unravel what was behind the odd registrations he discovered: a brazen attempt at election fraud. Read Article

Pennsylvania Democrats pass sweeping election overhaul through the House, but skip GOP-priority voter ID | Carter Walker and Stephen Caruso/Spotlight PA and Votebeat

A sweeping bill to overhaul the commonwealth’s election laws has passed the Pennsylvania House. Its changes would include creating in-person early voting, giving counties more time to process mail ballots, and requiring counties to use mail ballot drop boxes. But it doesn’t include one provision that will likely be important to its prospects: a voter ID requirement, something that Republicans, who control the state Senate, have always seen as crucial to any election law deal. State House leaders in both parties have lately said they are open to a voter ID requirement after years of partisan fights. The chamber even advanced a standalone bill, sponsored by two swing-district lawmakers, that would create a lenient voter ID requirement for all in-person voters. Read Article

Pennsylvania: Why election policy is still one of Harrisburg’s thorniest issues | Stephen Caruso and Carter Walker/Spotlight PA

For two decades, disputes over voter identification have sunk attempts to rewrite Pennsylvania’s badly outdated election law. But in recent years, prominent Democrats have offered tentative support for stricter rules. In March, state House Speaker Joanna McClinton (D., Philadelphia), a longtime opponent, publicly said she is open to expanding voter ID requirements as long as they don’t make it harder for people to vote. That’s a position echoed by Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro. In theory, Democratic support for a GOP priority should make it easier for Pennsylvania’s divided legislature to reach a deal that brings the state’s Election Code into the 21st century. The reality is much more complicated. Read Article

Opinion: Pennsylvania is in dire need of more in-person early voting options | Deborah Rose Hinchey/Pennsylvania Capital-Star

Pennsylvania voters have been given a raw deal when it comes to early voting options. As we head into another round of municipal elections, voters across the Commonwealth again face the dilemma of whether or not they should stand in long lines to cast their ballots early. Although the problem is worse in some counties than others, it is unacceptable anywhere. Pennsylvania’s current no-excuse mail ballot system is a good idea on paper, but the long lines early voters face are due to the fact that many voters are filling out their mail ballots in person before they turn them in, likely because they want to ensure they are filled out correctly and will, therefore, be counted. Therefore, in a state where nearly half of all counties don’t even have a ballot drop box, a strong, well-funded, and complementary-to-no-excuse-mail-ballots system that encourages early voting done in person is an absolute must. Read Article

Pennsylvania: Provisional ballots are increasingly being rejected for technical errors | Carter Walker/Votebeat

Provisional ballots are meant to be a fail-safe for voters, to be used when there are questions about eligibility or whether someone has already voted. They give election officials a chance to verify the ballot should be counted before they’re added to the tally. But in Pennsylvania, that fail-safe is failing more often. Between 2016 and 2024, the percentage of provisional ballots rejected due to technical errors on the outer envelope have increased from .95% to 4.92%. In that time, the commonwealth added no-excuse mail voting, a major change that dramatically increased the number of mail ballots counties receive and led to a related increase in the use of provisional ballots. Read Article

Pennsylvania can’t reject improperly dated ballots, federal court rules | Carter Walker/Votebeat

Pennsylvania counties can’t reject a voter’s mail ballot solely because they forgot to put the date on the return envelope or put a wrong date on it, a federal judge wrote Monday in a ruling that likely applies to the upcoming primary. The ruling is the latest — and likely not the last — in a long-running legal battle over enforcing the date requirement that has bounced around state and federal courts. U.S. District Judge Susan Baxter of the Western District of Pennsylvania ruled Monday that rejecting mail ballots for issues with the date on the outer envelope violates voters’ First Amendment rights, since voting is considered an expression of free speech. Misdated mail ballots are ones where a voter writes a date on the envelope that is outside of the range between when the county can first send the ballot and the day of the election. Read Article

Pennsylvania’s top election official warns against election security support cuts | Carter Walker/Spotlight PA

Pennsylvania’s top election official is warning the federal government that its decision to end a program that helps monitor and prepare for election threats will “make elections less secure.” In a letter to U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, first obtained by Votebeat and Spotlight PA, Secretary of the Commonwealth Al Schmidt noted the risks of withdrawing support for local election officials provided by the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. “I have seen firsthand how CISA’s work has helped prevent and address security incidents, and I worry about the serious consequences of removing this support for our local elections officials without an adequate substitute,” Schmidt wrote. Read Article