- Pennsylvania: Secure storage, tamper-evident seals, and dual election official oversight. No early mail ballot processing, causing delays.
- Wisconsin: Decentralized system with barcode tracking and mandatory audits. No early processing, similar to Pennsylvania.
- Michigan: Early ballot processing allowed in larger jurisdictions, strict absentee ballot safeguards, and expanded early voting options.
- Georgia: Air-gapped systems, GPS-tracked ballot bags, and hand count audits ensure security.
- Arizona: Advanced tracking, live video feeds, and mail ballot transparency. New hand-counting steps may slow reporting.
Quick Comparison
State | Early Processing | Tracking System | Key Safeguards | Challenges |
Pennsylvania | No | Real-time tracking | Tamper-evident seals, dual oversight | Delayed result reporting |
Wisconsin | No | WisVote barcode system | Dual signatures, public audits | Decentralized system |
Michigan | Yes (large areas) | Qualified Voter File | Early voting, strict absentee controls | Software testing updates |
Georgia | No | GPS tracking | Air-gapped systems, memory card backups | Delayed certification |
Arizona | No | USPS tracking, live feeds | Mail ballot transparency, air-gapped systems | Slower hand-counting |
These measures highlight the balance between security, transparency, and efficiency in managing ballots during elections. Early processing rules and chain of custody documentation are critical to minimizing delays and ensuring trust in election outcomes.
Securing American Elections
1. Pennsylvania Ballot Handling
Since 2020, Pennsylvania has introduced a detailed ballot handling process across its 67 counties, overseen by the Department of State.
In Philadelphia County, ballot storage facilities are tightly secured with strict access controls and round-the-clock surveillance. Accessing ballots requires at least two election officials, and every entry is digitally logged through a dual-verification system.
In Delaware County, officials use real-time tracking with unique identifiers to follow the movement of mail-in ballots. These local practices have contributed to the development of broader, state-level protocols.
Statewide measures include:
- Tamper-evident seals on ballot containers to prevent unauthorized interference.
- Policies requiring multiple election officials to handle ballot processing.
- Detailed documentation for every ballot transfer.
Larger counties have taken additional steps, such as enhancing mail-in ballot centers with secure access, monitoring systems, emergency backups, and certified public observation to ensure greater transparency.
2. Wisconsin Ballot Procedures
Wisconsin's election system is overseen by more than 1,800 local clerks, creating a decentralized structure that helps reduce the risk of widespread fraud. This system relies on WisVote, a digital platform that tracks ballots and integrates data from sources like the Social Security Administration and the Department of Corrections.
Absentee ballots are safeguarded through multiple layers of security. Each absentee ballot envelope features a unique barcode to prevent double voting. Additionally, voters must provide dual signatures - one from themselves and one from an adult witness, including the witness's address. Ballots are carefully inspected for signs of tampering.
"If it looks like it's been tampered with, we can't count it." - Elena Hilby, Sun Prairie Clerk
Electronic tabulators, approved by both the Wisconsin Elections Commission and the U.S. Elections Assistance Commission, scan and capture digital images of ballots. These images are randomized to maintain voter privacy. After general elections, a mandatory partial hand count audit is conducted to confirm the accuracy of these machines. However, Wisconsin's decentralized system presents challenges in applying uniform security measures across the state.
Security Feature | Implementation Details |
Ballot Tracking | Unique barcodes linked to the WisVote system |
Verification Process | Requires dual signatures for authenticity |
Documentation | Digital images stored with randomized identifiers |
Public Oversight | Municipal boards of canvassers hold public meetings |
Unlike Michigan and Pennsylvania, where election administration is centralized under a single office, Wisconsin's system is managed by the bipartisan Wisconsin Elections Commission. This commission plays a crucial role but has faced political pressure, including partisan attacks and impeachment threats, particularly after the 2020 election, which Joe Biden won in Wisconsin by approximately 21,000 votes .
Local officials emphasize the transparency and multiple safeguards built into the process.
"What I try to explain to people is there are many different safeguards in the whole process. We don't rely on a single point of failure anywhere along the whole stream." - Dane County Clerk Scott McDonell
"There is nothing to hide. The public has the ability to watch all parts of the process. The statutes outline in the various parts of our process the ability for observers. And I think that's really important. It's really important for people to know that there's transparency and they can watch any of the various processes and nothing is done in secret." - Cassandra Suettinger, Deputy Administrator, McFarland, Wisconsin
Municipal boards of canvassers hold public meetings to verify and certify election results, adding another layer of accountability. These measures highlight Wisconsin's distinct approach to election security compared to other key swing states.
3. Michigan Ballot Safeguards
Michigan has developed a detailed process to ensure secure elections, relying on the state-owned Qualified Voter File (QVF). This system requires specialized training and multi-factor authentication for access, adding layers of protection to ballot tracking .
For absentee voting, Michigan enforces strict chain-of-custody procedures. Each step involves multiple verification measures and thorough documentation. Election officials confirm voter identity and ensure no duplicate ballots are issued before providing an absentee ballot . Here's a breakdown of the key security measures:
Security Layer | Implementation Details | Verification Method |
Drop Box Security | Locked and bolted securely | Physical inspection |
Collection Protocol | Restricted to authorized staff | Documentation required |
Transport Security | Use of approved containers only | Chain of custody forms |
Video Surveillance | Scheduled for rollout by 2026 |
Since 2020, Michigan has introduced several updates to strengthen election security. Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson highlighted these efforts, stating, "Over the last several months, the state Bureau of Elections has worked with local clerks to conduct more audits than ever before in our state's history, and each has reaffirmed the accuracy, security and integrity of the November 2020 election" .
Audits in cities like Detroit, Grand Rapids, and Sterling Heights revealed minimal discrepancies, showcasing the effectiveness of these updates . Additionally, Michigan has implemented measures to prevent recounts in precincts with unexplained imbalances . However, an issue in Antrim County during the 2020 election led to enhanced software verification protocols. These new testing procedures are now being trialed in several counties .
Secretary Benson emphasized that successful election management balances secure systems with accessible voting options .
Following the approval of Proposal 2 in 2022, Michigan expanded early voting while maintaining strict voter ID requirements and security measures . These developments provide a basis for comparing election safeguards in other key states.
4. Georgia Ballot Security
Georgia has implemented a range of measures to ensure the security of its ballots, blending advanced technology with strict physical safeguards.
The state employs a thorough in-person voter verification process. Voters must present a valid ID, which is scanned by "poll pads" to confirm their information against state voter rolls . Once their signature is verified, voters receive an encoded green voter card that grants access to the ballot marking device (BMD).
In some counties, like Muscogee, additional steps are taken to track ballots. GPS trackers are attached to ballot bags, and Deputy Sheriffs conduct regular patrols between precincts . Nancy Boren, an Elections Official in Muscogee County, explained:
"We felt it was important to be able to track ballots since that is the official record of the vote from the polling place to the central tabulation, and we purchased the tracker so that we could do that."
Here’s a breakdown of Georgia’s key ballot security measures:
Security Layer | Implementation | Verification |
Voter Authentication | Poll pad ID scanning | Signature verification |
Ballot Creation | State-prepared and coded | BMD printing system |
Result Storage | Dual memory cards | Offline tallying |
Physical Security | Tamper-evident bags | Chain of custody records |
Post-Election Verification | Hand count audit | Percentage-based checks |
Following a security incident in Fulton County in early 2024, all counties now maintain Narcan supplies as a precaution . Additionally, the state collaborates with the Department of Homeland Security and Georgia Emergency Management Agency to inspect election equipment sites .
Georgia’s election system is entirely air-gapped, meaning it is not connected to the internet. Mike Hassinger, spokesperson for the Georgia Secretary of State's Office, confirmed:
"We don't use Starlink equipment for any part of our elections, and never have. Our election equipment is 100% air-gapped and never connected to the internet."
For tallying results, two election workers transport the primary memory card to county headquarters, while a separate chain of custody is maintained for secondary cards and paper ballots . Gabe Sterling, Chief Operating Officer for the Georgia Secretary of State, highlighted the importance of this system:
"You want to have an auditable trail. So that if the memory cards get corrupted, we lose anything that happens on these [BMDs], we can compare the paper records to the outcomes that came out of all the machinery to make sure that it's done correctly."
To address issues swiftly, Georgia has introduced a texting tool that allows poll workers to immediately contact election officials or law enforcement . This layered approach underscores the state’s commitment to maintaining secure and transparent elections, contributing to the broader efforts seen in swing states.
5. Arizona Ballot Management
Arizona enforces strict ballot management procedures, with Maricopa County - ranked as the third-largest voting jurisdiction in the U.S. - leading the way with advanced security measures. As of February 2025, Maricopa County oversees elections for 2,642,539 active registered voters, including 2,023,248 individuals on the active early voting list . These methods align with practices seen in other key swing states.
The state’s ballot management system is built on multiple layers of security, ensuring both transparency and accountability. Maricopa County’s ballot tracking system monitors every step of the process, from printing to counting. According to Maricopa County Elections:
"From the printer to your mailbox, until it's counted - know where your ballot is every step of the way. Maricopa County tracks every ballot so voters can have peace of mind knowing their vote was counted."
Security Feature | How It Works | Verification Method |
Early Ballot Tracking | USPS Intelligent Mail | Text/Email updates |
Drop Box Security | GPS tracking devices | Real-time location monitoring |
Processing Transparency | Live video feeds | Public access |
Signature Verification | Database comparison | Voter registration records |
Physical Security | Closed gateway systems | Offline, air-gapped systems |
These measures are supported by ongoing infrastructure upgrades across the state.
For example, Coconino County invested $1.5 million to upgrade its vote-counting facility . Eslir Musta, the county’s elections director, explained:
"The goal is to kind of have this brutal transparency for the public. There's nothing to hide. There's never been anything to hide."
Recent legislative changes have further strengthened ballot accountability. In Maricopa and Pinal counties, poll workers are now required to perform on-site counts of mail ballots dropped off at voting locations on election day . With an estimated 350,000 mail ballots expected across 235 voting locations, Jennifer Liewer, a county elections spokesperson, remarked:
"We want to set expectations that hand-counting is done by humans, and humans are imperfect. Exact counts are not expected."
Mail voting accounts for roughly 80% of ballots in Arizona . Each mail ballot undergoes identity verification, signature matching, tracking through arizona.vote, and is secured with tamper-evident seals to maintain the chain of custody.
Arizona counties also use air-gapped tabulation systems to prevent unauthorized access . Dana Lewis, Pinal County Recorder, highlighted the importance of these investments:
"How do you put a dollar sign on democracy?"
With strict physical and cyber security measures, including access controls and real-time monitoring, Arizona has positioned itself as one of the most transparent states in managing ballots during elections .
State Comparison Results
Analysis reveals that differences in how states handle ballots impact both the speed of result reporting and transparency. Here's a breakdown of key procedures and timelines for selected states:
State | Key Procedures | Processing Timeline | Gaps Identified |
Michigan | Allows jurisdictions with over 5,000 residents to begin processing mail ballots early; expanded early voting through a constitutional amendment | Up to 8 days before Election Day | - |
Arizona | Added a new step for counting mail ballots dropped off on Election Day | Election Day processing | New requirements may slow result reporting |
Georgia | Implemented a certification inquiry rule via the State Election Board | Election Day processing | Certification rule could delay results |
Pennsylvania | Maintains traditional in-person ballot handling; no early mail ballot processing | Election Day only | No early processing allowed |
Wisconsin | Same as Pennsylvania: traditional in-person handling with no early processing | Election Day only | No early processing allowed |
These variations highlight how states like Michigan, which permits early mail ballot processing, differ from states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, where such processing is prohibited. These choices directly influence how quickly results are reported.
System Vulnerabilities
In addition to procedural differences, technical weaknesses present risks to election security. Some of the most pressing issues include:
- Hard-coded passwords: For example, the password "dvscorp08!" has been found in systems in Georgia, Arizona, and Antrim County, Michigan since 2010.
- Weak administrative password protections: Insufficient safeguards leave systems exposed.
- Limited encryption: Many voting systems lack robust encryption, leaving data vulnerable .
"Election officials must be able to prove they were in control of ballots and voting equipment at all times. Strong chain of custody procedures and documentation help support the integrity of the election outcomes and enable election officials to tell the story of how each election was administered successfully."
"State Election Board missteps can delay results and weaken custody safeguards."
These findings emphasize the importance of balancing state-specific approaches with consistent security measures to ensure both efficient ballot processing and trustworthy election outcomes.
Key Findings
Here’s what the data reveals about ballot chain of custody in key swing states:
- Early Processing Rules: In 43 states, election officials can process ballots before Election Day, which helps minimize delays in reporting results. However, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin prohibit pre-processing, often causing delays in announcing outcomes .
- Chain of Custody Issues: Accurate chain of custody documentation is critical. For instance, Maricopa County, Arizona, failed to maintain proper records for at least 740,000 ballots during the 2020 General Election .
- Public Observation Matters: The "Australian Paper Ballot" method emphasizes transparent vote counting and thorough ballot tracking. This approach improves voter confidence and ensures accountability .
The Center for Election Innovation & Research highlights the importance of early ballot processing:
"Beginning to process mail or absentee ballots before election day gives election officials more time to detect, investigate, and address potential errors or irregularities before election day."
Federal law requires all election documents in federal contests to be kept for 22 months, underscoring the need for complete and accurate records . States that ban early processing face tighter deadlines, which can affect the accuracy of verification. More than half of U.S. states scan ballots before Election Day, though final tabulations are only completed after polls close .
Strong chain of custody practices, paired with transparent public observation, are key to maintaining trust in the election process. States that prioritize these measures often demonstrate a higher level of election integrity compared to those with stricter processing restrictions.
Comments