<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/4/1618258986952.png" alt="Incensed Rep. Vic Miller, D-Topeka, heavily criticizes a voting bill whose provisions, he said, would make criminals out of candidates and everyday citizens. (Tim Carpenter/Kansas Reflector)" />
 <figcaption>Incensed Rep. Vic Miller, D-Topeka, heavily criticizes a voting bill whose provisions, he said, would make criminals out of candidates and everyday citizens. (Tim Carpenter/Kansas Reflector)</figcaption>
 </figure>By NOAH TABORDA <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2021/04/12/lawmakers-finalize-effort-to-limit-mail-voting-in-kansas/">Kansas Reflector</a>TOPEKA — A pair of 
election bills passed by the Legislature to limit advance voting options
 and restrict the authority to change election law prompted passionate 
debate in the Senate and House.<a href="http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2021_22/measures/hb2183/">House Bill 2183</a>,
 opposed by voting rights activists, would restrict the number of 
advance ballots an individual may deliver on behalf of others to a 
maximum of 10, loosened from five in negotiations. In addition, the 
measure would remove the authority of the secretary of state to extend 
the deadline for receiving mail ballots.The bill also bans candidates from assisting neighbors, friends or family with their ballots.Rep.
 Vic Miller, D-Topeka, questioned Republican efforts to target the 
practice of so-called ballot harvesting — gathering advanced ballots 
from voters and delivering them to the election office. He said he often
 assists those in his community who request help filling out and 
delivering their ballot.Earlier
 this year, Secretary of State Scott Schwab reported no abnormalities in
 Kansas during the 2020 election. Why then is a bill criminalizing 
candidates and other citizens for assisting one another necessary, 
Miller asked.“For
 decades we’ve referred to it as ‘get out the vote,’ because in my 
party, we believe in making it as easy as we can for every individual to
 cast their constitutional rights,” Miller said. “Now you want to make a
 criminal out of people like me because people like me don’t sit at home
 and send out mail asking for people to vote for us.”Senators passed the bill 27 to 11, and within an hour, the House followed suit, 80 to 42.&nbsp;These
 measures come amid a nationwide push by Republican-led legislatures who
 argue increased election security is needed — after they’ve made 
unfounded claims of widespread voter fraud. In Kansas, this prompted 
some Democratic legislators and election advocates to raise concerns 
about the possible voter suppression such measures could cause.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/4/1618259043064.jpeg" alt="Sen. Richard Hilderbrand, R-Galena, says if candidates aren’t allowed to assist at the polls, they should not be able to deliver advanced ballots on behalf of another person. (Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector)" />
 <figcaption>Sen. Richard Hilderbrand, R-Galena, says if candidates aren’t allowed to assist at the polls, they should not be able to deliver advanced ballots on behalf of another person. (Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector)</figcaption>
 </figure>To counter GOP efforts, the Democratic majority in <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2021/03/04/u-s-house-passes-sweeping-voting-rights-package/">the U.S. House passed a voting rights package in March</a>
 which expanded mail-in voting and access to the polls. Republican 
legislators in Kansas urged the state’s delegation in D.C. to reject 
these proposed changes.While Miller has remained skeptical of some provisions included in the federal bill, <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text">HR1 or the For the People Act</a>, he said changes to election law should be working to raise — not lower — voter registration and turnout.Sen.
 Richard Hilderbrand, R-Galena, championed several of the voting bills 
proposed in Kansas, including limitations on candidates interacting with
 the voting process. He said situations like Miller’s are exactly why 
these measures are needed.Hilderbrand pointed to procedure and policy regarding voting in person on Election Day.&nbsp;“I
 do not believe as a candidate, I can sit (in the voting booth) and help
 people fill out their ballot or assist with the process of going 
through the ballot process,” Hilderbrand said. “If we are not allowed in
 that process that we should not be doing that outside of that arena as 
well.”The
 penalty for violating the proposed advanced ballot delivery provisions 
was lowered in the conference committee from a felony offense to a class
 B misdemeanor.While
 he praised the intent to secure future elections, Sen. Jeff Pittman, 
D-Leavenworth, said Kansas lawmakers were going about it the wrong way. 
He pointed to partisan election officials and dark-money groups funding 
campaigns as larger issues needing to be addressed.“Our
 focus in on these details is wrong and really restrict a vote of our 
people out there,” Pittman said. “I understand that desire to make sure 
no election is stolen, but I also want to fight those elections that are
 bought, and I think we’re going down the wrong direction.”<a href="http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2021_22/measures/hb2332/">House Bill 2332</a>,
 the second election bill considered late last week, passed in the House
 83 to 38 and in the Senate 27 to 11. The bill would amend the law 
regarding advanced voting ballot applications and require every county 
election officer to keep the residential and mailing address for each 
registered voter if they differ.Sen. Larry Alley, R-Winfield, addressed concerns regarding how this provision would work for people without housing.“A homeless shelter would 
be classified as their physical address,” Alley said. “They could 
receive your mail at a post office box, but the physical address had to 
be where they spend the night. It could even be in a car, actually, 
parked at a location.”<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/4/1618259072382.jpeg" alt="Rep. Blake Carpenter, R-Derby, says he considers House Bill 2332 a necessity to prevent the type of changes to election law made by the executive and judicial branch during the 2020 elections. (Tim Carpenter/Kansas Reflector)" />
 <figcaption>Rep. Blake Carpenter, R-Derby, says he considers House Bill 2332 a necessity to prevent the type of changes to election law made by the executive and judicial branch during the 2020 elections. (Tim Carpenter/Kansas Reflector)</figcaption>
 </figure>Perhaps
 the most significant section of the bill prohibits the executive and 
judicial branches from creating new election laws. Rep. Blake Carpenter,
 R-Derby, said this was in response to changes made by the governor and 
judicial branch last year during the pandemic.“If
 we’re going to pass laws, it should be the Legislature that does so,” 
Carpenter said, adding the provision would not interfere with the 
judicial branch’s authority to strike down unconstitutional laws.While
 both bills’ restrictions were softened in the conference committee, the
 effort to advance the legislation did not sit well with Rep. Brett 
Parker, D-Overland Park. He noted many of the bills had few proponents 
and those who did testify in support were all sitting legislators.“What
 is the point of our process that we go through here, where we let the 
public come in and testify and — as the opposition from people outside 
of the building is negative — we still advanced the legislation,” Parker
 said. “What are we doing? Who are we listening to at that point?”Both
 bills will now go to Gov. Laura Kelly. The governor has not said 
whether she would veto them. If she does, the House vote fell shy of the
 two-thirds majority needed to override a veto.

Lawmakers finalize effort to limit mail voting in Kansas