r/oregon • u/Stinging_Nettle • 7d ago
Political Oregon’s Vote-By-Mail needs you this weekend!
UPDATE: We broke it! lol!
Oregon's Vote-by-Mail Needs You This Weekend!
A bill in the Oregon Legislature (SB 210) that would REPEAL our vote-by-mail system is getting a public hearing on Monday March 31. You've all read the news this week - Trump wants to ban mail voting nationwide, and his acolytes are trying to ban it here in Oregon. Submit written testimony OPPOSING this anti-democratic bill in Oregon by Monday morning here:
https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2025R1/Testimony/SRULES/SB/210/0000-00-00-00-00?area=Measures
You can read the bill here:
https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2025R1/Measures/Overview/SB210
And you can watch the hearing on Monday at 1 PM here:
https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/mediaplayer?clientID=4879615486&eventID=2025031388
41
u/Few-Cabinet3309 7d ago
Here is my testimony to them!! If you dont know what to write or want to hear what I said...
" I am writing to express my strong opposition to any attempt to remove mail-in voting in Oregon. Our state has long supported accessible, secure elections, ensuring that every eligible voter has the opportunity to participate. Mail-in voting works. It increases voter turnout, builds trust in our election system, and has no evidence of widespread fraud.
This bill is not about election integrity—it is a blatant attempt to suppress votes and serve an authoritarian agenda. Oregon voters have already made it clear: we support mail-in voting. It is unacceptable for you to undermine the will of the people to appease political figures like Trump and Musk.
You were elected to represent us, not them. Your duty is to the people of Oregon and the Constitution, not to a political regime that seeks to dismantle democracy. If you vote to take away mail-in voting, you will go down in history as those who failed the people you swore to serve. But if you stand against this attack on our rights, you will be remembered as leaders of integrity who defended democracy.
Make us proud. Vote NO on this bill.
Sincerely,"
4
u/plzkillmehnow 6d ago
Appreciate you sharing. It helped get me started so I could submit a testimony as well!
28
u/senadraxx 7d ago
Yeah, this would be disastrous for the state. There are several other bills in committee right now that would effectively kill most of the ways Oregonians can register to vote. This state has some of the best voter turnout in the country, and we accomplish this without lines that require people to wait for hours, like Texas, for example.
All of that is at risk.
Call and email your state reps, they need to hear you.
19
u/Greygal_Eve 7d ago
My testimony:
Requiring in-person voting only and only on election day would be borderline catastrophic for eastern Oregonians. Many of us live 10, 20 or more miles away from town centers, libraries, etc., where polling places are/would be. I personally live 18 miles away from the nearest town hall - 32 miles round trip. Imagine being forced to drive in the middle of a snow storm that far just to vote - especially if you are elderly (and we have a LOT of elderly people in eastern Oregon)! This is further exacerbated by the lack of public transit in most parts of eastern Oregon.
The simple fact that this disproportionally negatively affects eastern Oregonians means it also disproportionally negatively affects Republicans. While I'm not a supporter of most Republican policies (even though I live in a "red" area), I strongly believe the right to vote applies to EVERYONE, and any attempt to restrict, limit, hinder or otherwise discourage ANYONE from voting is not only unconstitutional, but also un-American.
Oregon's vote by mail system has worked excellently for literal decades. It saves counties and states money. It is safe and encourages greater civic engagement. It is convenient for working parents, elderly, handicapped, college students, executives ... everyone!
I strongly oppose SB210 and hope you keep Oregon's mail-in voting system intact.
41
u/rocketmanatee 7d ago
I'm surprised they're working so hard to prevent their conservative base from voting since they don't live near polling stations.
17
u/theRAV 7d ago
I'm sure they'd find a way to make exceptions for rural folks and people in the military.
7
2
u/Lobsta1986 7d ago
I'm sure they'd find a way to make exceptions for rural folks
Isn't that like half the state?
9
u/theRAV 7d ago
More than half of the land, but land doesn't vote.
2
u/Lobsta1986 7d ago
What I mean is if they made exceptions wouldn't half of the people have exceptions due to ruralness?
7
u/theRAV 7d ago
Only a third of Oregonians live in rural areas, and they typically vote Republican. My bet is that if the sponsors of this bill had their way, the rural people would be able to easily get exceptions to vote by mail while people in cities will have to wait in line for hours.
5
u/Lobsta1986 7d ago
In the last city I lived in before we had a drop box at the library I couldn't imagine not mailing it in. Driving 1 1/2 hr round trip is a no go for me .
9
15
u/CPSolver 7d ago
The conflict between political left and political right is an entertaining distraction from the bigger fight between the biggest campaign contributors (who are now billionaires rather than millionaires) and us voters. This bill is partially an attempt to undermine the successful use of ranked choice voting in Portland and Corvallis. Ranked choice voting gives us a way to bypass the excessive influence of money.
3
u/sumtwat 7d ago
I am curious how this would stop ranked choice voting. How are you thinking it would?
I don't live in areas with it, but don't you just choose your pics in order than the run off happens during the count? You are not voting multiple times.
5
u/CPSolver 7d ago
Ranked choice voting allows more candidates to be in each election contest. Imagine that each general election offers two Republicans and two Democrats (plus others). That's how ranked choice voting should be done.
That means ranked choice voting requires more time to learn about more candidates, and it requires remembering more candidate names. That makes it difficult to do quickly in a voting booth.
Marking a ranked choice ballot at home makes it easy to flip through the voter pamphlet and watch debate videos and rank the candidates as you decide each contest.
1
u/sumtwat 7d ago
I don't get your argument on this. If you are showing up to the polls without research it's no different than getting your mail in ballot and filling it in blindly. You will still have time with the voter pamphlet before hand either way. You can still do all the research you need and makes notes on what to vote on.
But you really didn't answer how this affects rank choice voting.
Don't get me wrong, I like being able to be on the internet and take my time filling out a ballot at my home.
1
u/CPSolver 7d ago
Perhaps I should have emphasized this point: Ranked choice voting accommodates lots more candidates.
Consider Portland's city council election. Each voter was asked to rank up to 6 candidates out of a list of about 30 candidates. It was a non-partisan election, so none of those 30 candidates have a party label (Republican, Democrat, Green, etc.). To avoid wasting your vote on a candidate who other voters dislike, you need to rank at least 3 candidates.
That takes much longer than just marking the Republican/Democratic/WorkingFamily/Whatever candidates, where there is only one such candidate in each contest. If the voting is done in person, that requires more voting booths, or longer lines, or more people choosing not to vote.
1
u/sumtwat 7d ago
Again, you can't answer the question.
2
u/CPSolver 7d ago
I thought you asked how this bill, SB210, if passed, would affect ranked choice voting in Oregon. Basically I'm saying there would be lots of complaints from lots of voters about how hard it is to fill out a ranked choice ballot in a polling booth, and how long the voting lines are, and those complaints would lead to a repeal of ranked choice voting.
If you are asking a different question, please clarify. Thanks!
0
u/LuckyNumber-Bot 7d ago
All the numbers in your comment added up to 69. Congrats!
6 + 30 + 30 + 3 = 69[Click here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=LuckyNumber-Bot&subject=Stalk%20Me%20Pls&message=%2Fstalkme to have me scan all your future comments.) \ Summon me on specific comments with u/LuckyNumber-Bot.
2
u/shadetree-83 7d ago
Not sure I connect your dots to rank choice, bit the macro view sure hits home with my disdain for the corrupt two party system that makes it increasingly difficult for Independents and third parties to even make the ballot. Keep fighting the good fight.
6
u/CPSolver 7d ago
Ranked choice voting is not vulnerable to vote splitting. Vote splitting is what makes it easy for the biggest campaign contributors to control both parties. Normally that tactic is used in primary elections where it's difficult to see.
For a recent clear example of the vote-splitting tactic in a general election, recall Oregon's latest election for governor. Nike co-founder Phil Knight (multimillionaire) gave money to Betsy Johnson to split votes away from Democrat Tina Kotek, which lowered the number of votes needed for the Republican candidate to have won instead.
Ranked choice voting was used in the recent election for Portland mayor (without any primary). Winner Keith Wilson defeated the biggest-funded political-right candidate (Gonzales) and the second-biggest-funded political-left candidate (Rubio). If the old voting method had been used, the political-right candidate would have won because of vote splitting to another political-left candidate (Mapps). Mayor Wilson is quickly making progress toward solving problems that previous politicians had failed to handle in a competent way.
1
u/shadetree-83 7d ago
You infer that Phil Knight’s support of Betsy was less than genuine. As one who voted for her, I have to challenge that assumption. Regardless, I still haven’t connected your dots from mail-in issue to ranked choice. Ranked choice could be applied to both mail-in and in person voting. No?
4
u/CPSolver 6d ago
We know Phil Knight's support for Betsy was not genuine:
- He gave even more money to the Republican candidate.
- Clearly his goal was to defeat the Democratic candidate, Kotek.
- We know Knight is likely to have hired election-manipulation experts to help him identify the best tactic for changing the election outcome.
Personally I disliked all three candidates. I suspect lots of other voters also felt this way.
If we used a well-designed version of ranked choice voting there would have been a second Republican and second Democrat on the ballot. They would be the candidates in the R and D primaries who got the second-most votes.
Yes, voting in person can be done using ranked choice ballots. However, that would require voters to spend more time in the polling booth to work out the ranking of candidates (instead of just marking one of those candidates, probably based on party affiliation), or else writing notes (in advance) about preference order (which most voters would not bother to do). Either way, that would increase the time in the polling booth, which would increase the length of lines at the polling locations, which would cause lots of voters to choose not to vote (which amounts to illegal voter suppression).
27
u/UnderratedZebra17 7d ago
Submitted testimony. Some notes for anyone else looking to cite data:
Consider the logistical and financial nightmare of having 4.2 million people taking a day off to overwhelm polling booths. Does Senator David Brock Smith have a plan to run more polling facilities? The bill shows that it, "May Have Fiscal Impact, But No Statement Yet Issued." Oregon had the lowest Cost of Voting Index value in 2024 with universal mail-in ballots. Does Senator Smith have a plan to cover the additional cost to push us to the other end of the Index?
4
11
u/PDXGuy33333 7d ago
Done.
We were the first state in the country to go all mail when in 1998 Oregon voters approved Measure 60 by a margin 69.39% to 30.61% with about 1.1M votes cast. An epic landslide.
It is no coincidence that Republicans want to privatize the United States Postal Service - doing so would place voting by mail in private hands, which no one would find acceptable.
Trump himself said the quiet part out loud, expressing his fear that if mail voting becomes the norm no Republican will ever be elected to office again. Let's see that happen!
6
u/terposaurus_ 7d ago
The president has no authority on elections. This is a state matter, and if the blue state of Oregon allows this to happen will be a travesty. Show us all the proof there is fraud.
6
u/MadMan3985 7d ago
Done. My wife and I both submitted testimony opposing this ridiculous piece of legislation.
6
u/dradygreen 6d ago
Done! Thank you for raising our awareness and making it easy to submit our opposition.
5
5
u/ThoughtSkeptic 6d ago
Submitted testimony opposed to this bill. This bill screams voter suppression. Make no mistake, this bill is anti-democracy.
10
u/Dazzling-Nature-73 7d ago
I thought trump wanted to give more power back to the states. I'd love to see CA, OR & WA become part of Canada. Those who don't like it can move to Idaho, Utah, whatever.
4
u/MorkelVerlos 6d ago
I wrote mine!
To start, I think it’s important to make it known that I consider myself an advocate for the furtherance of democracy and democratic principles. I believe that civic engagement and participation are the bedrock of a healthy government. We know that allowing for mail in ballots increases participation in our electoral processes because it allows a level of convenience and flexibility that in person voting simply cannot. There is plenty of information available which indicates that in person only voting causes lower turnout period. We also know through that there has been a systematic whittling away of voting rights in this country, which has culminated in the 2024 election where it has been reported that nearly 4.6 million voters were purged from voter rolls all over America. Any democratically elected official who advocates for measures that would decrease voter participation is inherently antidemocratic, hypocritical, and does dishonor to their position. You’ll notice that conservatives exclusively wage an endless battle against measures which simplify the process. Measures, that are widely accepted in other healthier democracies around the world that we (up until very recently) consider our closest allies and partners. They know that the more access people have to vote, the harder it is to control the outcome. I know they’ll say they’re protecting the ballots from illegal activity, but they have zero evidence that isn’t manufactured and tailored to show exactly that. The most recent attempt at the new Jim Crow propaganda, 2000 mules is a flimsy, theatrical, laughable attempt at weaving a narrative that thousands of POC were harvesting and stuffing ballot boxes, which of course has absolutely no merit. It is a a Trojan horse to allow the wolf to guard the henhouse of the American voter system. Audits have shown that in states like Oregon there is very little evidence of any fraud that isn’t accidental in nature. In fact, many recent national audits in a variety of different types of districts have turned out evidence of fraud in support of conservative candidates. Simply put the idea that there is mass voter fraud and corruption is something that exists only in the heads of those who seek to gain from the suppression. They’d like for us to believe it, and they think if they keep saying it over and over we’ll just give up and believe it. Well I won’t. And I hope you won’t either. I personally view this plot as extremely sinister, and I believe that they are fully aware and intentional with their attempts to silence democracy. All the while accusing citizens who try to bring democracy to the masses of being “un-American”. It is cynical, disturbing, and dangerous activity, to say the least. If there was some type of evidence of wrongdoing on a large scale they would’ve shown it a long time ago, and we’d all agree that some type of safeguard was necessary. As it stands, that is not, and has not ever been the case, except for through measures like voter purging, exclusively in person voting, intimidation, and gerrymandering, which of course the right advocates and uses to their great benefit regularly. Anyways. I digress. Please, do whatever we can to ensure that we do not allow any restrictions to our revered, beloved, and nationally envied voting system. The future of our democratic republic is at stake here and Oregon can and should be principled in its democratic values.
Thank you.
Peace, love, and justice.
Xxxxx
3
u/Radicalforpeace 7d ago
Well, I’m curious to see how our Lincoln County representative Anderson voted on this. How does a republican get elected here on the coast?
4
u/RottenSpinach1 7d ago edited 4d ago
In Curry County? Registered Republicans outnumber Democrats.
https://data.oregon.gov/Administrative/Voter-Registration-by-County/nnmk-ymgu
3
3
1
u/faithbeforefame5 5d ago
As for me, I live in a city... on the outskirts. I have no car, and as for standing long periods of time, I have bad knees. My standing limit is 15 minutes, and that is painful! I want to vote. With mail in, I have to walk to the mail slot, and it's done! There is only a few local reasons I can think of why you would vote in person. Catch up with your neighbors, but that requires you go at the same time. Then this lovely idea that we are all cheating, it's a bit ridiculous. I remember having to vote in person, it was terrible. My first presidential election, I had just had a baby that was still in the hospital and I had to leave him to go vote then run back to the hospital. You think, no big deal, but I lived in Walton, OR. and my baby was in Florence, OR. So I know about rural voting, not fun!!
1
u/KangarooStilts 5d ago
The funny thing is, Donald Trump claims that there is widespread voting fraud with mail-in ballots. But mail-in ballots can only be sent to registered voters with valid mailing addresses. There's far more opportunity for fraud (not saying there is any, BTW) with electronic voting machines at in-person polling places.
1
u/Illustrious_Tap3171 Oregon 5d ago
If you need help with what to say this can help
https://www.acludc.org/en/tips-and-template-written-and-oralrecorded-testimony
-6
u/Takeabyte 7d ago
Wait what? I read the EP and thought he was just banning the acceptance of mail in ballots that arrive late? That’s still bad for us, but it’s not an outright ban on it. What did I miss?
11
u/UnderratedZebra17 7d ago
It would no longer be universal. The state would no longer cover the cost of postage. You must be "unable to vote in person" to request mail-in.
7
5
u/EE_Tim 7d ago
SECTION 1. ORS 254.465 is amended to read: 254.465. (1) County clerks shall conduct all elections in this state [by mail] in person, on the date of the election and at a voting booth maintained under ORS 254.474. (2) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section, any elector may request that the county clerk provide the elector with a ballot that may be returned by mail if the elector: (a) Is for any reason unable to vote in person on the date of the election; and (b) Requests a ballot that may be returned by mail no later than 21 days before the date of the election.
1
-2
u/christchex91 6d ago
Voting needs to be done in person on paper Oregon's mail in voting is unconditional and needs to be changed
-24
u/Inevitable_Reward823 7d ago
On the one hand, I really like mail in voting as it's easier for me. Hell, I'll find excuses not to have to go anywhere on my weekend.
On the other hand, even though we had notified each time that my great grandmother was deceased, she continued to get ballots for the following midterm and presidential elections after she had passed. We just burned them and notified appropriate authorities that they needed to take her off the list. Eventually, they solved it. I worry about that sometimes.
Instead of getting rid of mail-in ballots, I'd like to see voter re-registration every 4 years. Clean the rolls out and make sure they're clean.
17
u/ZPTs 7d ago edited 7d ago
Family/next of kin notifying the county clerk is one way the system works, though they have other methods for receiving records of death. They are maintaining the voter rolls constantly. While there have been recent dust-ups with DMV (an agency many legally have to interact with), transactions/interactions there also update the voter records.
Taking away a person's right to vote (even temporarily) is a big deal, so it's important there's due diligence toward that end as well. What if I got a voter list of of active voters of an opposing party who regularly vote (public info and legal) and randomly reported they were deceased?
-1
u/Inevitable_Reward823 7d ago
I feel like you didn't actually read my comment. We did take the death certificate to the county clerk and the DMV and eventually the state when the ballots kept arriving. It eventually stopped, but not until two elections later. It was just concerning.
I am and always have been for mail in voting.
14
u/korinth86 7d ago
While it shouldn't happen, it's not a huge problem. Why? Because it gets caught all the time when people fraudulently cast votes for dead family.
Could we do more to stop it? Yes. Is it a good reason to stop vote by mail? No.
0
u/Inevitable_Reward823 7d ago
I agree, it was just a pain in the ass to get it fixed for my family. I like mail in voting.
6
-3
u/HughesDabs420 6d ago
Ban mail in voting. Our post box was vandalized 3 times during voting process. Cheating is much harder to do when having time vote in person with ID. No ID , no vote. Simple.
-2
u/Game84ND17 6d ago
I'm for banning mail in voting. It's a waste of tax dollars, is open to copious amounts of fraud, and is inefficient in counting votes in a timely manner. I say we have a mandatory Election Day holiday or require businesses to give time off to vote in elections. It is un-democratic to allow practices that jeopardize the security of our democratic processes.
There is no reason why it should be taking us as long as it does to count votes.
-9
u/AstronautDesperate64 7d ago
Thank you for the link! I just voted in support!
5
u/PDXGuy33333 7d ago
Republican doesn't want to encourage voting. Good to know.
You do know that this bill has no chance of passing, don't you?
-8
u/bronco_bud 7d ago
I’d rather vote in person.
10
u/PDXGuy33333 7d ago
You vote in person when you mark your ballot, put it in the envelope, sign the outside of the envelope just as you would sign the voter rolls at a polling place, then drop it in the mail or a dropbox.
You can go stand in line in the rain if you want. I prefer to have 2+ weeks to look over the voters pamphlet and make my choice in the comfort of my own home.
There has never been a significant instance of fraud in any Oregon Vote By Mail election.
1
u/emmett445 6d ago
Oregon has tons of fraud in vote by Mail that is why democrats are fighting to protect it
1
u/PitifulAdvantage7321 5d ago
It's cheaper for the state to have mail-in-voting. In person voting costs more in tax money. It also makes it more difficult for eligible voters who must make long commutes or might have difficulties standing in line for long periods of time or might not be able to get time off work to attend. In person computerized machines are also more vulnerable to fraud. The machines are essentially black boxes: enter your vote, and who knows what comes out where? Whereas mail-in-ballots are sent by county Boards of Election to individual registered voters at individual addresses. Rigging the vote through mail-in-ballots in a given state might mean stealing thousands of ballots from hundreds of different post offices, or two or three ballots each from hundreds of thousands of mailboxes. Returning them to be counted for your candidate would mean forging millions of recorded signatures. It is therefore actually more difficult to commit voter fraud with mailers. In person is a worse system by every metric. edit: spelling error.
157
u/somethingnotyettaken 7d ago
It's always good to engage with your elected officials and make your voices heard. With that said, there is no way in hell Oregon Democrats will be passing a repeal on vote by mail.