PRESS RELEASE
FORMER MINORITY LEADER PATRICIA MORGAN
For Immediate Release
November 2, 2026
Where Is the Public’s Right to Observe Ballot Handling? Rhode Island’s Board of Elections Process Limits Meaningful Oversight
Rhode Islanders have a right to meaningful observation of how their ballots are received, verified, and counted. That right is not being honored under the current Board of Elections procedures. Observers are largely confined to carefully staged viewing areas that offer limited insight while critical steps remain out of public view.
Loading Dock: No Observation of Ballot Arrival
Observers are not permitted on the loading dock to witness the arrival and cataloguing of drop-box ballots or those delivered by the postal service. Key questions remain unanswered in real time: Are arriving ballots counted and catalogued upon receipt? Are they tagged so that numbers can be reconciled at every subsequent stage? Is documentation reviewed and authenticated? Do any ballots arrive from unofficial sources? Without access at this first point of entry, the chain of custody begins outside public view.
Signature Verification: Transparency Ends After Stage One
The signature verification process has four stages. Stage One is visible: images of the reference signature and the ballot signature are displayed on screens that observers can watch. When signatures clearly do not match yet the ballot is advanced, observers may complete a challenge form. However, only individuals with a formal relationship to a campaign or political party may submit such forms, effectively limiting challenges by ordinary concerned citizens.
The use of technology should be employed to remove human error. Bank verification software has been used successfully to protect banking transactions, they can also be used to protect our most precious voting system.
During extended observation of Stage One, a substantial share of ballots—appearing to be in the range of 20–25 percent—were rejected at that initial review. The remaining three stages occur out of public sight. In Stage Two, a smaller group of employees re-examines the rejected ballots and advances the large majority. Stage Three involves mailing cure letters to voters; again, a significant number are ultimately approved. Stage Four consists of the Board itself reviewing a small remaining set of ballots and approving nearly all of them. The visible portion of the process creates an impression of rigorous scrutiny that is not matched by the later, non-public stages.
Requests for basic data from prior elections—number of ballots received, approvals and rejections at each stage, address confirmation rates, and final rejection totals—have been deferred until after the election. Such figures should be readily available and routinely published.
Vote Tally Compilation: Restricted Room, No Public or Bipartisan Observation
Security around tabulation equipment improved after concerns were raised in the last election; flash drives carried by individual workers and unsealed ports are no longer used. That change is welcome. However, vote tallies from early voting, Election Day polling places, and mail/drop-box ballots are now transmitted by cable into a locked room. Access is limited to a small number of officials, described as the Director and Deputy Director—individuals on the same administrative team. No bipartisan observer pairs and no media are allowed inside.
In a state where many races are decided by fewer than 100 votes, the final aggregation of results should not occur behind a closed door. Public observers and the press should be able to watch the addition of the various vote streams and the announcement of results.
The Standard That Should Apply
Every material step of ballot handling should be open to public observers who can play a meaningful role, not merely a ceremonial one. Procedures that restrict observation or limit challenges undermine confidence. The current system falls short of that standard.
The longer-term remedy is a return to primarily same-day, in-person voting, with a limited number of absentee ballots reserved for voters who have a valid reason. The pandemic justification for expansive mail and drop-box voting has long since passed. A process in which 20–25 percent of ballots are initially flagged for signature issues is not the system that best serves Rhode Island voters or restores public faith.
Local media and the public must stop accepting staged glimpses and demand real access. Fair and honest elections are not built on processes the public is told about—they are built on processes the public can see, question, and verify. The current system fails that test. It is time to insist on elections that are fair and honest.
Contact:
Patricia Morgan Contact:401-862-3040