TOPEKA — House Democrats heckled Leavenworth Republican Rep. Pat Proctor’s latest idea to undermine advance voting after he forced a hearing on a bill that nobody was willing to support.
Proctor, who chairs the House Elections Committee, and vice chair Rep. Paul Waggoner, R-Hutchinson, expressed ignorance during a hearing Tuesday about how House Bill 2493 could lead to fewer ballots being counted. The legislation would require anyone who delivers an advance ballot on behalf of somebody else to put their driver’s license number on the ballot envelope, raising privacy concerns, and that they be a qualified elector, which would disqualify the high school students who volunteer to assist voters.
Ann Mah, a former legislator from Topeka who once served as the ranking Democrat on the committee, said the bill was an example of “pure partisan politics.” She pointed out that the Democrats who use advance ballots outnumber Republicans by a 2-to-1 margin.
“That’s called, ‘If you can’t win, cheat.’ There are so many close races that if this bill became law, it could certainly swing more than a few elections,” Mah said.
Proctor, who is seeking the Republican nomination for secretary of state, has railed against an imaginary “axis of ballot harvesting,” and a make-believe international conspiracy to undermine elections. He has said that he would prefer to get rid of advance voting entirely and only allow votes to be cast in-person on Election Day. This session, as in past years, he has proposed measures that would make it more difficult to vote in advance.
He took the unusual step of holding a hearing on HB 2493, even though he couldn’t find a single person to testify in favor of the bill. Numerous people voiced opposition.
The proposal would build upon a 2021 law the Legislature passed in response to bogus complaints about the validity of the 2020 presidential election. That law restricts volunteers from delivering more than 10 ballots on behalf of others, even though there has never been evidence that a fraudulent ballot was delivered. Proctor said the driver’s license number would make it easier to verify whether someone had exceeded the threshold.
Opponents such as Mah, who described herself as as “granny activist,” said HB 2493 would just serve to intimidate people into not offering to help their neighbors.
“It is pure voter suppression,” Mah said. “I am a proud and unabashed ballot harvester. This committee has tried to make that term a dirty word, so let me clear the air. A ballot harvester is someone who wants to help neighbors make their votes count.”
‘Crazy question’
Mah’s testimony prompted questions from Proctor and Waggoner about how the bill could possibly lead to fewer votes being counted.
“I can’t see the addition of, ‘Oh, by the way, I’m going to put my driver’s license on here,’ is much of a change at all,” Waggoner said.
In addition to the privacy vulnerability, Mah told him a “great number of people” don’t have a driver’s license.
“You have one, correct?” Waggoner said.
Mah told him there were people who have a suspended driver’s license or can’t afford one.
“I mean, all of us in here, you know, middle class, privileged people, it’s no big deal for us to go down and get a driver’s license,” she said.
Proctor asked her about the concern with requiring a qualified elector to deliver a ballot.
