This is the first part in a two-part series on Election Day in the United States. 

Our current Election Day processes make no sense. Our response to this lunacy — from absentee voting to in-person voting laws — makes even less sense.

I was 17 when I first became aware of this madness. Coincidentally, it happened during my AP Government and Politics class, one of the courses that fulfilled Illinois’ civics requirement.

My parents voted in every election, even the year my dad was in the urgent care center. The expectation was that I’d do the same. I understood my civic duty and saw it as a badge of honor — a symbol of American democracy and a voice for the people.

You can imagine my confusion when I read 2 U.S. Code Section 7, which defines Election Day as “the Tuesday next after the first Monday in November.”

Here’s how my junior year social studies teacher Mr. White explained it: Federal law requires congressional and presidential elections to be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November.

For many of us, this means Election Day falls on an inconvenient day. It also guarantees that every four years, members of Congress across party lines debate the impracticality of this schedule while failing to enact change or even reach a hint of bipartisan consensus.

This cycle of debate has been ongoing since the law’s passage in 1845. Since then, the U.S. has industrialized, debatably re-industrialized, amended the Constitution to include a woman’s right to vote, and passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

But has the government changed the day Americans vote? Nope. Oddly enough, the most recent constitutional amendment proposed in 1789 wasn’t enacted until 1992. That amendment, the 27th, prevents changes to congressional salaries from taking effect until after the next election.

Despite its intention, the amendment has done little to suppress corruption among election officials, especially regarding voting laws.

In 2021, several right-wing lobbies and dark money funders were exposed for funneling millions of dollars into passing stricter voting laws. Their goal was simple: favor Republican candidates and block Democrat-backed voting rights bills. This attempt to skew voting laws hasn’t changed.

Before 1845, states could hold elections any time within a 34-day period before the first Wednesday of December. Keep in mind, this system was used during a time when communications were limited to physical mail delivery carried by a horse and cart.

This monthlong process allowed states to choose a date best suited for their constituents. The hope, after all, was to get as many voters as possible.

As America’s communication systems and travel networks developed, so did the need for an established Election Day. When the law was passed, 69 percent of the workforce was farmers, many of whom required travel days to vote. Naturally, voting laws were written to accommodate their schedules.

By 1845, market days were typically held on Wednesday, which meant Monday and Thursday were out of the picture. Most Americans were also devout Christians, so Sunday wasn’t a viable option. That left Tuesday, Friday, and Saturday. Elected officials decided on Tuesday.

Since then, little has changed — unless you count the rise in electric vehicles, the 74.6 million women in the workforce, and the 34 social platforms with more than 100 million active users.

Does 2 U.S. Code Section 7 reflect these changes? It depends. If expanding the law to include congressional elections counts as reasonable change, then sure. If you hoped for more, look elsewhere.

State-by-state laws

Consider this: Today, only two percent of Americans work in agriculture. Compare that to the 78.7 million Americans working hourly jobs, and you start to wonder why Election Day is still held on Tuesday.

Yes, 46 U.S. states and Washington, D.C., offer early voting by mail or in person. Of those, nine automatically send ballots to all active, registered voters. Eight allow in-person early voting but require an excuse for mail voting. Four states lack an early voting option and require voters to provide an eligible reason to vote by mail.

But state-by-state voting laws don’t tell the full story.

Across the country, there are 10 common eligible reasons voters must give to receive an absentee ballot, including an illness or disability, a work shift during all polling hours, or being over a certain age. Seven of the 10 arguably pertain to demographics that may not be able to vote early in-person either.

Take Iowa for example. If an Iowa resident attends school out-of-state, they likely won’t be in-state for the 20-day early voting period. What about mail-in ballots?

Iowans must request a mail-in ballot for each election and provide an eligible reason. Seems simple, right? Not exactly. As a student, I can’t tell you how many “inconsequential” tasks slip my mind. Sure, voting in a presidential election isn’t inconsequential — it’s incredibly consequential, especially given the current political landscape.

That said, when something only happens every four years, it’s fair to assume some students will forget to request a ballot 15 days in advance.

As an Illinois native, this is all terribly confusing. Not only do Illinois’ voting laws differ from Iowa’s — and we’re only a state away — but they differ from those in every state.

In Illinois, no identification is required to vote in person. The state implemented automatic voter registration, also known as AVR, in 2017, which meant I registered to vote when I got my license.

For vote-by-mail, or absentee voting, I can request a ballot anywhere from three months to five days before the presidential election. I can vote in person up to 40 days before the election, no excuse needed. I can even sign up for permanent vote-by-mail.

Now, forget about students and think about groups who might encounter barriers when voting.

How do we accommodate non-English speakers? After all, the U.S. doesn’t have an official language. How do we make crowded polling locations worth the wait? In Georgia, that’s not a concern — the state made it a crime to provide water to voters waiting in line. What about people with children who don’t qualify for early voting?

Barriers to voting

To some of you, this probably reads like a load of bull. People should want to vote, and they should make accommodations to do so.

I agree — to an extent. Yes, people should want to vote. No, people shouldn’t have to jump through hoops to make that possible.

If someone feels disillusioned by the voting system or the candidates, how can we expect them to go the extra mile to vote? I don’t think we can.

In primary elections, which decide candidates, many states require voters to register with a political party. Those who refuse to affiliate often can’t vote for presidential nominees.

In some states, voters who don’t register a party preference can cast a crossover vote for the Democratic, Libertarian, or American Independent parties, but not the Republican or Green parties. Those require voters to re-register with their party.

Only 15 states have open primaries, meaning voters of any affiliation may vote in the primary election for any party. And still, all primary systems — open, closed, and semi-closed — are subject to “sabotage.” Even a degree in political science might not make sense of what is so senseless. At least not for me, so I won’t attempt to here.

What’s more concerning is that elected officials have made comments like, “We need to get back to 1958-style voting.”

Really, John Fillmore? This guy’s home state of Arizona had a literacy test in 1958 — a requirement we’ve done away with as a nation because, oh, wait, it’s racist and ableist. Need I remind everyone that 1958 also predates the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act?

But sure, John Fillmore, let’s get back to a time when your election is guaranteed because the only people eligible to vote are those who look and think like you. No wonder he lost the 2022 Republican primary.

Not every Republican has echoed Fillmore’s comments, but many have shown they feel similarly.

Between Jan. 1 and May 3 this year, six Republican-led states enacted restrictive voting laws, citing concerns about mail-in voting fraud.

This is despite the fact that the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, a component of the Department of Homeland Security, said there was “no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes or was in any way compromised” in the 2020 presidential election.

Like everything in life, language matters. Republicans have used this truth as a tactic to create more gray areas.

The new restrictive voting laws have been criticized for failing to clearly define their parameters. In Alabama, for example, it’s unclear if someone can be held criminally responsible for providing postage stamps to a neighbor distributing absentee ballot applications.

It’s hard to say — and even harder to argue — that wasn’t the intent of Republican lawmakers.

Where do we go from here?

Believe me, I know there’s more nuance to this than I’ve included. That’s the problem. Why is there so much complexity when it comes to voting in America? Shouldn’t the goal be to eliminate confusion and streamline the process so voter turnout reflects that?

Despite voter turnout soaring in recent years, the U.S. still ranks 31st against 49 other countries, sandwiched between Colombia and Greece for election turnout. Not exactly a high bar for a country that’s been defined as a “global superpower” and a “hero in the fight for democracy.”

In a country that prides itself on democracy, it’s time we make voting something every American can easily do — no excuses, no exceptions.