A streak in jeopardy -- Kentucky's primary voting rules put my participation in danger

One of the things of which I'm most proud in my life is my voting record. I have voted in every election for which I've been eligible with one exception. That came during my college years in either 1982 or 1983 (I'm not for sure which year). I was home in May between the spring semester and the summer session, we decided to take an impromptu family trip, and it was too late for me to request an absentee ballot. That's the only election I've ever missed.

I turned 18 in December of 1979, so my first vote came in the 1980 primary election. I voted absentee when I was away at college, and at my local polling place during every other election except one. I even briefly changed my registration to Rowan County when I was in college to vote in a special election in Morehead that was of personal interest. That's how important the electoral process is to me.

Voting was a big deal in my family. My brother and I always accompanied our parents to the polling place just a couple of miles out the road. I usually went into the voting booth with my dad, and my brother went in with our mom. I would turn the knob to close the curtain, pull the levers my dad indicated on the machine that was taller than I was, then turn the knob to cast the vote and open the curtain back up. Voting was instilled in me at an early age as my civic duty.

But this year I fear my streak could be in jeopardy, thanks to decisions made by Kentucky's governor, secretary of state, and Board of Elections. As a response to the coronavirus situation, the state has implemented guidelines for this year's primary election that run counter to the way I prefer elections to be administered.

I'm a firm believer that elections should be generally be conducted in person and on one designated day, with participation limited to those legally entitled to vote. Twelve hours on Election Day is plenty of time for anyone who wants to vote to be able to do so. Absentee balloting should be restricted to those who will be out of the county on Election Day, and mail-in votes should be allowed only for those physically unable to go to the polls.

I'm opposed to voting by mail on the premise that it makes it easier for voter fraud, specifically vote buying and selling, to occur. The time-honored way in Kentucky to buy votes was to do so via the use of absentee paper ballots. The buyer could easily verify if the seller voted the way they promised by being present with them when they marked their ballot. Kentucky made drastic cuts in vote buying when voting booths were put into use for absentee balloting, with paper ballots reserved only for those who would be out of the county during the entire absentee balloting period, or those who had physical ailments that prevented them from leaving home to go vote.

I'm also opposed to the use of paper ballots. Other than the times I voted absentee by mail when I was in college, I have never used a paper ballot. I have always voted via machine, first on those tall mechanical beasts of my childhood that actually had the retractable curtains surrounding them, then on various models of computerized touchscreen machines. Paper ballots provide too many possibilities for fraud, either from people stuffing the ballot boxes, or by ballots being stolen.

Finally, I'm against the concept of early voting. Too many things can happen between the advent of the voting period and the actual Election Day. Kentucky has already started its emergency early voting process, and a number of ballots had already been cast in the U.S. Senate race prior to the endorsements of Charles Booker by Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the Courier-Journal, and the Lexington Herald-Leader. No doubt there will be plenty of other developments in the race prior to the June 23 election.

Sadly, all three of these bad ideas are being put into practice for the Kentucky primary election, along with a strict limitation in the number of open voting locations that is dissuading voters from going to the polls on Election Day and instead utilizing some combination of early voting and vote-by-mail, or both.

In my own county, only one voting location will be open for the entire county. There will be two machines at that location, and both of them will be supplied by the state. They will use paper ballots. The county will not be using the computerized touchscreen voting machines it already owns. Voters are being urged to apply for absentee ballots, and to complete them at home and either mail them in or drop them off at the county clerk's office. Alternately early voting at the clerk's office is being allowed, but by appointment. The state is making it intentionally difficult to vote in the normal manner.

I'm in a quandary. My intent is to vote in person on Election Day, even though I'll be forced to use a paper ballot. I do not want to legitimize a faulty procedure with which I disagree by participating in it. I'm healthy and I'll be home on Election Day. Even though my mind is pretty much made up as to how I'll vote, I want to wait to make up my mind in case there are late revelations about the candidates that could sway me against my choices or in favor of someone else, so I don't want to vote in advance of Election Day. There's no good reason for me to participate in a process that is an open invitation for fraud.

But what happens if I get to the polling place and there's a very lengthy line? I have no desire to stand and wait for a long time, especially if there's a mandatory mask requirement (I'm not wearing a mask anywhere except when I go to my office, and that's only because it's required; I haven't worn one anywhere else and I don't plan to.) I'd hate to arrive on Election Day, see a line that exceeds the length of my patience, and then turn around and go home (and forego the four hours of paid leave I will get for voting that day).

This is an important election. My district has an open Kentucky House of Representatives seat, and a longtime friend of mine is one of the candidates for the Republican nomination. The state may claim it's making it easier to vote, but that's not the case with me. They're pushing me into a process that runs counter to my principles in a number of ways.

It's frustrating. Kentucky's new secretary of state, Michael Adams, ran his campaign on the slogan "easy to vote, hard to cheat," primarily by pushing for stronger voter identification laws in Kentucky. But he's either forgotten, or is conveniently ignoring, Kentucky's sordid history of vote buying by approving and promoting a system that uses paper ballots and allows voting by mail.

This response to the coronavirus is overblown, as have been most of the state's actions the past few months. The state had already postponed the primary election by a month. It would have been more than sufficient to reduce the number of polling places in each county by half or by two-thirds, making sure the same number of voting machines was available as usual countywide, and using the traditional absentee balloting process. That would have cut down on the risk of illness for precinct workers and voters alike. It would have preserved the best aspects of the traditional voting process, which serves Kentuckians just fine, without introducing an increased possibility of fraud.

The only bright spot is that since there are federal races on the ballot this year, vote fraud becomes a federal offense rather than a state offense. The recent vote buying prosecutions in Kentucky have occurred in federal court, where convictions are more likely and punishments are harsher. If some sort of shenanigans do come into play, they'll be dealt with.

The state isn't communicating to the county clerks very well about what will happen this fall. My own county clerk is unsure about whether or not we'll go back to our usual touchscreen machines, which is her desire, or if the state will insist on using the paper ballots. The November election date is set by federal decree, and the state can't change it or push it back. And who knows if the governor will still be using the excuse of a viral emergency to impose his dictates upon the people? We already have organizations canceling events well into the fall. Who knows if the fall election will be a normal situation, or if we'll still be operating under the emergency provisions under which the primary is being conducted? And with the amount of pushback against the primary voting process that Republicans are giving, and with the pressure that President Trump is exerting against widespread mail-in voting, will Adams allow another altered election process?

I hope things go smoothly on Tuesday, May 23. I hope I can arrive at my county's single polling place, get access to one of the two voting machines quickly, and know the names of the winning candidates later that evening. But I'm fearful that something will happen and my long streak of election participation, dating back to that spring in the early 1980s, will be snapped.