Decision 2020 (October Mag)

The Berkeley Beacon October 12, 2020

Why your absentee ballot might not count

By Diti Kohli Pg. 9

Why I’m fiscally conservative, but socially liberal Pg. 4

The “Divider-in-Chief” changed more than just laws Pg. 5

It might already be too late for you to vote Pg. 14

October 12, 2020

H ar me out Paige Thimmesch Camilo Vilaplana

“Fiscally conservative, but socially liberal” Page 4

Two students debate a common argument in politics, “I’m fiscally conservative, but socially liberal.” Who’s right? That’s up to you to decide.

Features Katie Redefer Shawna Konieczny

“The ‘Divider-in-Chief ’ ” Page 6

Jakob Menendez Magazine Editor Diti Kohli Editor-in-Chief Domenico Conte Content Managing Editor

The Beacon interviewed several Emerson community members about how President Trump has expanded America’s social divide.

Dylan Rossiter Operations Managing Editor Tomás González Visual Managing Editor C. Fox Ditelberg Copyeditor Contributors Camilo Vilaplana Paige Thimmesch Katie Redefer Shawna Konieczny Joey Ploscowe

Photo: President Donald Trump speaking at CPAC in 2011 (Gage Skidmore/Creative Commons)

Diti Kohli

“Why your absentee ballot might not count” Page 10

Voter suppresion has transcended all generations––even ours. Here’s (almost) everything that could stop your ballot from making the final tally.

The Arts Magazine Staff

“All the deadlines you need to know to vote” Page 14

Have you not requested your absentee ballot yet? Assuming you’re not from Massachusetts or an international student, you need to request one now before it’s too late.

Joey Ploscowe

“President Trump and the USPS” Page 15

An on-the-nose political cartoon from the newest illustrator at The Beacon Magazine.

Any and all comments on articles can be directed to Magazine@BerkeleyBeacon.com Pitches can be emailed directly to our Magazine Editor at Jakob_Menendez@emerson.edu The only student newspaper of Emerson College.

Editorially independent, Founded in 1947.

172 Tremont Street, Room 309 Boston, MA 02117 (617) 824-8687 Contact@BerkeleyBeacon.com

If you care about anything,

pretty pretty please vote It goes without saying that this presidential election is one of the most, if not the most, important elections this country has ever seen. On the ballot are a myriad of issues including, but not limited to: climate change, racial equity, gender equality, reproductive rights, and healthcare for all. Voting may not give you clout (up for debate), or TikTok fame. But what it will do is ensure the staples of democracy are upheld. Generations of citizens before us fought for our right to show up to the polls, and the one thing you can do to honor them is create the largest youth voter turnout this country has ever seen. Flip to Page 14 for information on registration and absentee ballot deadlines.

Jakob Menendez Magazine Editor

3

H ar me out Emerson’s premier destination for sharing opinions

The oxymoron of being fiscally conservative and socially liberal

By Paige Thimmesch

Remember when you first learned of oxymorons in grade school, and you sat in class for the rest of the day thinking of new ones? They’re kind of funny, the irony that exists in a few simple words. Jumbo shrimp. Bittersweet. Deafening silence. Clearly misunderstood. Socially liberal, fiscally conservative.

Identifying as socially liberal and fiscally conservative tells the world I care about people but not enough to see them cared for on a systemic level. The key thing that socially liberal, fiscally conservative supporters miss to see is that, in this capitalist global economy, money is the materialization of care. Empathy can only go so far when there are lives at stake, and empathy needs the funding to turn into comprehensive action.

Imagine the American political spectrum as a line, one end labeled “left” and the other labeled “right.” There’s a small rectangle drawn in the middle of the line called The Overton Window, marking the moderate viewpoint. This box shifts on the line, and anything within that box, no matter its placement on the line, represents normalized ideas, while anything outside The Overton Window is considered radical. American politics is right leaning, with The Overton Window skewing slightly to the right. For example, the U.S. still does not mandate paid leave for new parents, and a universal healthcare, although gaining traction by progressives, continues to be seen as radical. Expanding the social programs of the United States, from the perspective of the right-leaning Overton Window, is seen as expensive, unnecessary, and an infringement on individuality. Those that tout conservative fiscal policy want less government, constantly seeing it in opposition of individual freedom. And what’s more American than that phrase: individual freedom? I’d argue one better: systemic change. No matter how well a fiscal conservative convinces themself that they’re socially progressive, it isn’t enough for the wellbeing of all beings if that blockade of American individualism keeps standing in the forefront of American political ideology.

I’ve brought up hypotheticals, oxymorons, and have explained The Overton Window, but nothing helps understanding like an example. So here’s a real issue: The West Coast is on fire, Louisiana’s industrial wasteland nightmare “Cancer Alley” continues to kill the people living there, and Florida is experiencing coastal flooding that’s only expected to get worse in the next 30 years.

Climate change isn’t imminent, it’s now. With the current rate of global greenhouse gas emissions, the average world temperature will increase by four to eight degrees Fahrenheit in this century. The global climate is warming from burning fossil fuels, taking non-renewable resources for free from the Earth. But, in life nothing’s free. The price humanity is paying for extracting and exploiting the Earth for centuries is climate catastrophe. The

4

only way to mitigate climate change predicates on two things: spending money and cooperation. Fiscal Conservatism contradicts both. In conservative ideology, money is for the individual, used only for one’s personal gain, while cooperating with any institution larger than oneself—government, usually—devalues the individual, the freedom one has to do anything they please.

Fiscal conservatism is an ideology for the privileged, the people who remain unaffected by the current disasters of climate change because of their wealth. Fiscal conservatisms assume everyone has access to freedom, but that’s simply not true for people with no financial means to support them.

Fiscal Conservatives who are detached from lower-income communities, the people suffering the most from climate change, don’t want to extend the money that would alleviate their burdens. Individual freedom is taken away by a single wildfire, a single hurricane, a single industrial plant, and collective financial aid is the only thing that will reduce the harm, not financial independence. One cannot call themselves socially liberal if they refuse to provide the means to make those socially liberal beliefs a reality.

Because of the Overton Window tilting towards the right, American politics has villainized the Green New Deal for its expensive goals. Even Joe Biden in his presidential campaign has denied association with it. Fiscal conservatism, no matter the political affiliation, is popular because it’s seen as a “moderate” stance when issues come up with a big price tag. However, withholding funding isn’t the absence of action but a deliberate one. It’s saying to the communities that need funding we value money more than your life. If socially liberal, fiscal conservative ideologs really valued freedom, they wouldn’t be fiscally conservative. What they really mean when they say that they value freedom is not freedom for all people, but freedom for their wallets.

Paige Thimmesch is a sophomore studying journalism

I’m fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

Let me explain

By Camilo Vilaplana

Many people believe it is impossible to marry the idea of social liberalism with economic conservatism. This is simply wrong.

In fact, Libertarians define themselves as just this. We advocate for minimal taxes and government spending, but also maximum freedom of choice.

Libertarianism is ultimately based on the non-aggression principle, or NAP, which the late Nobel awarded economist Milton Friedman explains best as being the “smallest, least intrusive government consistent with a maximum freedom of each individual to follow their values and ways, as long as they do not interfere with others doing the same.”

This belief is rooted in an uncynical faith in others’ ability to act on moral principles that most of society already agrees upon. Most of us do not murder, rape or steal—not because the government tells us not to, but because our moral compass tells us this is wrong. We do not want the government to tell us what to do, because we do not need it to. I will always fight for freedom above anything else. And it is not freedom from a civilized society; it’s freedom to be one without having it forced on us.

Personally, what brought me to this ideology was the fact that my parents were born and raised in Cuba. The communist government of Cuba has been extremely aggressive with socialist economic reforms, like high taxation and free education and healthcare for everyone. This whole system is crumbling. Hospitals are disgusting and ill-equipped. For example, my uncle, an anesthesiologist, was sent on two medical missions to Bolivia and Angola for a total of six years abroad. What does he have to show for it? A fridge from the early ‘90s, an old motorcycle, and less than $1000. The pay in Cuba? 25 dollars a month, if you are a doctor.

While my uncle was working for a pittance for the government, my father moved to Havana in his early 20s. Due to laws that prohibited Cuban nationals from staying in hotels and made renting impossible, he ended up living on the streets for a year, sleeping in graveyards, the only place in Cuba where people won’t try to take the little you have. After this crude experience, the “special period” hit. With the fall of communism, Cuba descended into chaos.

The USSR was not there to supply the island, which produced nothing itself. People turned to street animals and mops—yes, mops—for food. It’s an old family story that my dad killed a cat and ate it with his friends.

My parents thankfully escaped this hellhole, and I was born in Colombia. This is why I value both social and economic freedom.

My parents had neither.

People believe this ideology is selfish and “forgets” low-income people. But in reality, the forgotten people are the ones who don’t even have the opportunity to help themselves or get help from

others.

I believe there are ways to help underprivileged people away from the overreaching hand of government. Charities received 449.64 billion dollars in 2019 in the United States, according to Giving USA, a public service initiative that tracks charitable spending. There is considerable evidence that cutting taxes boosts charitable giving. As the tax rates in the United States have gone down, charitable giving has more than doubled since 1979. In fact, 2019 was the best year ever for charities even with lower deductions throughout the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. More money in people’s pockets means more charitable giving. What would happen if tax rates went down along with welfare? Would we see a booming charity industry where low income populations are better taken care of than today? I would bet all my money on that.

Another refrain popularly attributed to libertarians is the idea that “Taxation is Theft.” If someone made you give them your money at gunpoint, what would you call that? Why is that any different than what the government does with just a few degrees removed from the coercive power of the gun?

As a Libertarian I say this, not because we are against taxation, but because we are against any non-consensual agreement.

Most taxes operate in this way—we pay them because we are forced to. This is why lots of Libertarians oppose broadly coercive taxes but support things like sales taxes, which you agree to upon making a purchase. Several studies, including one from the Beacon Hill Institute, support the fact that sales taxes alone could fund the minimal state Libertarians begrudgingly recognize as necessary.

In the book “Anarchy, State and Utopia,” philosopher Robert Nozick describes the minimal state as something like a “night watchman” state, with powers limited to those necessary to protect citizens against violence, theft, and fraud. He explains how this is the maximum moral limit of the state as more than this would operate on non-consensual power positions from the government to the citizens.

I prioritize economic freedom first over social freedom because poor countries have no way of helping their underprivileged people. Chile is a great example of this. Social reform does not bring about economic freedom or success. However, economic reforms bring prosperity and with it, social mobility and security that paves the way for complete freedom of the individual. It is a valid criticism that this focus on economic freedom leaves people behind at times. But the path to success is not easy and we’ve tried everything else.

Camilo Vilaplana is a senior studying visual and media arts.

5

Features

The “Divider -in-Chief”

By Katie Redefer & Shawna Konieczny

Illustration: Shutterstock

F

our years ago, Americans introduced themselves to President Donald J. Trump by marching onto the streets in defiance, huddled shoulder-to-shoulder sharing hand-knit hats, protesting across all 50 states in the largest single-day protest in U.S. history.

The three million protesters expected the four-year journey ahead to be unsteady. But nothing could prepare Americans for the extent of social division and emotional uncertainty rampant in 2020.

Eerie silence became the new normal as COVID-19 tore through bustling cities, leaving behind a spattering of disposable masks strewn across sidewalks. Thousands of immigrant children sit confined in cages at the border, separated from their families. Countless small businesses have permanently shuttered due to the worst economic downturn in a century.

Black Lives Matter activists are resilient in their demands for racial justice, and yet the only “justice” handed down for the killing of Breonna Taylor was charging one of the three officers responsible for shooting the neighboring apartment’s wall.

The Beacon interviewed eight Emerson community members of varying political backgrounds, including conservatives, liberals, independents, and democratic socialists, all of whom agreed the social divide between Americans vastly expanded over the duration of Trump’s presidency—whether this be caused by Trump himself or factors outside of his control.

President Trump is polarizing by

At best, Trump’s bigoted comments spawn countless dinner table arguments.

But at worst, his hate inspires harassment, violence, and murders.

nature. He began his bid for president in 2015 by calling Mexican immigrants criminals and rapists. In a leaked Access Hollywood tape from 2005, Trump bragged about how he assaults women with ease using his celebrity status, uttering the infamous words, “Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.” One could list at length the racist, sexist, and bigoted statements President Trump has made over the years. Yet still, Trump’s offensive remarks seem only to further enthuse his more radical supporters.

At best, Trump’s bigoted comments spawn countless dinner table arguments across the country. But at worst, Trump’s

7

hate inspires harassment, violence, and murder. It is no wonder having a bipartisan conversation in 2020 feels impossible when one side of the argument seems inseparably tainted with hate.

Gregory Payne, the Chair of Communication Studies at the college, likened President Trump to a “divider-in-chief,” saying he has torn apart Americans of differing political backgrounds.

“There’s not a better Divider-in-Chief than him,” Dr. Payne said. “He is somebody who can find something, and divide even the closest of friends. As I said, we’ve lost our civility, and instead of just ignoring things, we take his red-meat rhetoric, and we go after it. And sometimes we destroy relationships and friendships because of it.”

The past four years in the United

States have been undeniably marked by instability. In those four years, there has been two government shutdowns, a presidential impeachment, and a global pandemic. Numerous national protests dominated city streets, three Supreme Court justice seats were vacated, at least 100,000 people died from gun violence, and at least 200,000 Americans died from COVID-19-related causes.

Dr. Payne said after Trump’s first term, many Americans “would like to have a nap,” and even compared his presidency to riding a rollercoaster for four years straight.

“It’s like we’ve been at Six Flags on the roller coaster for four years. And each time when you think another hill couldn’t get any worse, then all of a sudden we get another one,” Dr. Payne said. “And anytime you might start saying, ‘gee, we’re in dangerous situations’, [Trump] throws another one at you. So, I think we’re very tired.”

Americans’ daily social media use has piled onto the political exhaustion, while also further deepening the social division.

Online platforms can create a digital echo chamber, where specific ideological positions are continuously reinforced while opposing views are automatically rejected, a 2019 study by five psychologists from three separate universities suggests.

Junior and registered Democrat Claire Kong said she often witnesses unproductive political arguments on Facebook and thinks in-person conversations are more worthwhile.

8

“The best communication happens in person when you can hear tone and read body language. And when you’re sitting face-to-face, you need to establish a more meaningful connection,” Kong said. “So, I don’t think meaningful conversations can really happen on social media.”

With greater accessibility to alternative news sources from the internet and online debates, one might expect voters’ opinion of the president to fluctuate more than in previous decades. Yet President Trump’s approval ratings over the years have barely budged, unlike most presidents who tend to see more approval fluctuation, said Director of Emerson College Polling Spencer Kimball.

“The only thing stable in his presidency is his approval,” Kimball said. “It stays at 43, 44 percent. We [Emerson Polling] tend to have it higher than other polls.

But still in the other polls, I really haven’t seen much in a long time under 40 [percent], and the lowest it’s been is 38. This is far from what other presidents have,” Kimball said. “Obama came in like the high 50s or 60s, and then it comes down into the low 40s. So there’s some movement. Trump comes in at 44, and now he’s probably sitting at 43 or 45. It’s just very strange.”

The divide between both parties

seems to increase more each day, each struggling to piece together the moderate and extremist sides of their party. Allison Payne ‘20, a conservative alumnus who majored in political communications and created the College Republicans chapter at Emerson in 2019, said the divisiveness of modern politics has made some Americans feel out of place. (Allison Payne has no relation to Dr. Greg Payne.) The College Republicans chapter disbanded after Allison’s graduation.

“Why can’t we have many people along different lines of the spectrum within each party? We just can’t do it anymore, it’s because of our media landscape, it’s because of the divisiveness, and it’s because of the polarization,” Payne said.

Payne also said that although she still plans to vote for Trump, sometimes people’s opinions of him feel so polarizing, she wonders if Biden winning the presidency would be better for everyone.

“I ask myself all the time, ‘Is it better that Biden wins, like, just for the sake of everyone?’” Payne asked. “I just don’t

“Sometimes especially with the scrutiny towards me and my family, I just wish Trump would go away. But I obviously don’t want his policies and everything to go away, so it’s hard.”

know, sometimes especially with the scrutiny towards me and my family, I just wish Trump would go away. But I obviously don’t want his policies and everything to go away, so it’s hard.”

The divide between conservatives deepens as Trump repeatedly finds himself in dire controversy, forcing conservatives to ask themselves what remarks are too offensive, if any at all. Meanwhile, Republican voters are left to decide what is most important to them—conservative policies, or defying Trump’s off the cuff remarks.

Senior political communications major Kathryn Smith, a self-identified democratic socialist, said it seems there is no room for anti-Trump conservatives within the Republican Party and that her own aunt and uncle have recently left the party.

“We’ve definitely become more polarized than we previously were, and I think it has changed our idea of what it means to be a Republican,” Smith said. “I have an uncle and an aunt who have been diehard Republicans for their entire lives, and they just recently changed their party registration because they’re like, ‘I can’t be associated with that party anymore.’”

Smith went on to explain that she believes Trump’s presidency has alienated some moderate Republicans from the party, while radicalizing the conservatives who remain.

“A lot of people have either significantly distanced themselves from the Republican party or are holding on much stronger,” Smith said. “There’s not really any room for Republicans who aren’t Trump-Republicans. Because even if you maybe don’t have the same ideals as Trump-Republicans, you still by holding on to that [Republican] title are saying that you, in some way, do align with [Trump’s] values and are not afraid to have that title next to your name.”

Allison Payne, however, said she does not agree with many things Trump has said, but that she prioritizes policies that match her conservative views over Trump’s offensive statements.

“I support Trump to the extent that he enacts conservative policies,” Payne explained. “I do not agree with most of the things that come out of his mouth and or his Twitter. And that’s what’s really hard about a lot of conservatives, too, is that a lot of people will immediately call me a Trump supporter and put me in

all these categories, such as like, you’re racist, you’re anti-women, you’re x,y, and z, where it’s like, no, I’m just really talking about his policies.”

However, the fractures within American politics are not limited to one side of the spectrum. The Democrats saw dissent within their own party that began with the public distrust of 2016 presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, and snowballed out of control when the establishment repeatedly undermined former presidential nominee Bernie Sanders over two primaries.

Sophomore political communications major and registered Independent Eric Toalson said he believes the establishment Democrats often ignore the interests of the far-left, hence their aversion to the party.

“The division in the Democratic Party comes from the establishment and the centrist people that control the party just blatantly ignoring the far-left in trying to get by without really taking into account their needs, their wants. And the far left has felt that for decades now,” Toalson said.

“They’ve been trying to advocate for equal rights, better environmental protections, better wages, better work benefits, and they just have been getting shoved under the doormat, basically, and forgotten about.”

In instances like when the Democrat-

ic Party nominated former Vice President Joe Biden for President, far-leftists and young voters further distance themselves from the Democrats—some already denouncing voting for Biden in November.

Senior political communications major and registered Democrat Allison Valton said it’s unsurprising to her that some far-leftists do not want to vote for Biden because he does little to welcome them to the party.

“The race is too close for my comfort right now,” Valton said. “Democrats are currently lying in their own grave, they dug this hole, this is their bed they’re lying in. This has been years in the making.

They played their hand in 2016 when they gave us Hillary Clinton, and it’s been downhill since because they just can’t recover. They can’t recover from the blatant disregard for this large group of people who now feel completely unattached to them.”

However, Valton clarified she believes as a self-identified progressive and a supporter of former Democratic presidential nominee Elizabeth Warren, that not voting as a far-leftist is a mistake.

“It’s a mistake not to vote,” Valton said.

“If you have that strong of an opinion about leftist policies, you want to at least move in the right direction, so you should vote for Biden. However, I can see why they feel like that. They feel ignored, so they will not participate. That’s how human nature works.”

Dr. Payne said when he worked for Robert “Bobby” Kennedy’s campaign in 1968 in his early 20s, he was with the campaign on the day Bobby Kennedy was assassinated. Dr. Payne sat out of the election that year, he said, because he couldn’t bring himself to vote for the new Democratic nominee at the time, Hubert Humphrey.

“In 1968 when I was [college] age, Kennedy was killed. I didn’t do anything for like a month. I stayed in my room and I was depressed, and mad, and upset,” Dr. Payne said “People said, ‘We better vote for Humphrey,’ and my response was ‘Humphrey, Humpty-Dumpty, who cares about Humpty-Dumpty? I’m not going to vote.’ And I didn’t vote. And guess who won? Richard Nixon.”

Dr. Payne went on to say he’d give anything to go back and vote that year. As someone who knows the consequences of not voting, he urges young people not to make the same mistake he did.

“I would say, as someone who made that mistake, to anybody that you’re writing to, ‘Do not do as Dr. Payne did. Vote.’

Because when you’re my age, you’re going to live with that each and every day, when you think about what you could have done and you didn’t do,” Dr. Payne said.

“Your most precious right as an American citizen is to vote, and you should vote before it’s taken away from you.”

Katie Redefer is the Deputy Living Arts Editor for The Berkeley Beacon and a junior studying journalism.

Shawna Konieczny is a junior in the IDIP program . magazine@berkeleybeacon.com

9

Features

3 reasons why your vote could get trashed

Illustration: Shutterstock

By Diti Kohli

D

ays after Noah Matalon moved into the Little Building to begin his Emerson career, his mom paid him a visit. She buckled into her Acura RDX and made the two-hour drive east on I-84, from West Hartford, Connecticut to Boston. With her, she brought the request form for Matalon’s mail-in ballot, the one he will soon use to vote in his first-ever election.

“Everyone has some worries about the postal service,” Matalon said. “She wanted to make sure my first time voting goes smoothly, so she brought it to me. We both felt strongly about this.”

Matalon expects she may pop by again in the coming weeks with his actual ballot in tow. “Worth it,” he said.

Some may say a single ballot in the presidential election, which drew 137.5 million voters in 2016, is not worth the effort. But in 2020, the sanctity and legitimacy of mail-in voting has been called into question by President Donald Trump himself.

His comments are rife with attempts to squander the efficiency—and the budget—of the United States Postal Service, a long-loved institution responsible for the country’s mail circulation.

Taking a well-intended road trip to secure the fate of just one absentee vote is understandable, Matalon said.

Millions of college students nationwide—and hopefully thousands on Emerson’s campus—will partake in the democratic process this month. In 2018, college data showed that almost 45 percent of Emerson students voted. (This year, college officials hope at least 70 percent of the student body will turn out and have been promoting voting through official Instagram accounts and the Campus Vote Project.)

These students may return to nearby hometowns to visit in-person polling stations, or they could opt to vote by mail, like Matalon. That way, their electoral choices would be neatly enclosed in a white envelope, transported from postal worker to postal worker, and quietly counted—at least, in theory.

In fact, a record-breaking number of mail-in ballots are expected to be cast in November’s election, according to CNN. The uptick can be largely attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic, which presents dire health concerns for anyone who braves the polls in person. Long lines and close

contact with poll workers on-site pose potentially fatal risks for all Americans this year. Fewer citizens may be willing to pack indoor venues to share writing utensils and breathable air, even if that’s the only way to secure their democratic rights. The virus, after all, has spread rapidly anywhere and everywhere, from college campuses to weddings to the White House.

On paper, mail-in voting should be ideal, effortless even. Why commute to a station and wait in a queue if you don’t have to?

But the reality is that even if every step is attentively followed, a slew of concerns could still impede citizens’ mail-in votes.

Here’s (almost) everything that could stop your ballot from making the final tally—and what you can do to make sure that doesn’t happen.

Becoming a Voter? It’s harder than you’d think.

Jonah Bowen’s AP Government teacher handed him a voter registration form during his senior year of high school. The teacher instructed students to fill in the blanks and then turned their requests in for them—no questions asked.

“It was amazing. I didn’t have to do anything on my own,” Bowen, a Warwick, New York native, said. “That made it so much easier.”

But Bowen can’t imagine the convoluted process he would’ve had to undergo if his teacher hadn’t been so generous. Now 19, he can see himself crouched in front of a computer, surfing websites, searching for the way to track down the New York regulations ahead of what he called the “most critical” election season in decades.

Several students told The Beacon that registering to vote is sometimes a terrifyingly complicated process. Most expect an intuitive path, a go-to procedure they can jump on days after turning 18. But some said they spent upwards of an hour wading through the forms and sites. Sometimes, they had to enlist the help of more experienced voters: parents, friends, and faculty.

“It gets very confusing for students to vote,” Spencer Kimball, assistant political communications professor and the director of Emerson Polling, said. “And I don’t think that’s unintentional.”

Each individual state runs separate voter registration processes, conducted through a conglomeration of physical forms or outdated websites that preclude even the

most technology-savvy voters. Data from the National Conference of State Legislatures showed that upwards of 40 states allow online voter registration, but select spots like Arkansas and Wyoming have held onto the physical tradition.

18 states have stringent voter ID requirements that further hinder the process, according to a January report from The Guardian. Georgia, for example, requires voters to have a driver’s license or state ID priced between $25 and $30 that is only available at Department for Motor Vehicles offices.

“The whole process isn’t made to be easy,” said first-year creative writing major Matthew Pelton. “You have to do so much research. It’s kind of discouraging.”

College students also have to grapple with where they should register. Depending on their residency status, Emerson students may have the choice to become a voter in Massachusetts or their home state. Students must have a permanent address in another state to register there.

Junior Anna Bohman said she was confronted with the choice when registering over the summer. She wrangled with the decision. Should she have her presidential ballot branded with her Massachusetts address or her one in Florida, where her family lives?

“I knew I was getting an apartment in Massachusetts, but my dad said you should still register in Florida because it’s a swing state,” she said.

Kimball explained that the issue of residency is “just another hurdle” to voting.

“Voting requirements for residency are more state of mind than state of place,” he explained. “Voting doesn’t care about your physical space.”

Missed deadlines, forgotten votes Other times, forgetting to sign a form or sending one in too late can make or break an individual’s capacity to vote.

“Perhaps the most dangerous [step] is deadlines,” Kimball said. “Because once that deadline is passed, then you’re no good. If you want to wake up on Election Day and vote, you can’t unless you’ve already registered, which you have to have done days before.”

One NPR analysis found that at least 550,000 absentee and mail-in ballots from this primary season have been rejected so far. That number far outpaces the amount

11

318,728

absentee ballots were rejected in the 2016 election.

More than

550,000

have been rejected thus far in 2020.

Source: NPR 12

“Everyone has some worries about the postal service.”

Noah Matalan, pictured right on Boston Common.

of rejected ballots in the 2016 election, which sat at 318,728. The same story noted how first-time mail-in voters, especially those from marginalized communities, were more likely to have their ballots rejected, either for lateness or a clerical error.

Every state adheres to strict voter registration deadlines that range from more than a month before the election to the day of. (North Dakota, Colorado, and District of Columbia have some of the most lenient timelines.)

Bohman said she began to worry in mid-September when her absentee ballot had not yet arrived. She requested it almost a month earlier, and the website had told her to expect it in one to two weeks.

“Every day, I was checking the mail, and I worried I had registered wrong,” she said.

“I started freaking out a little bit.”

But students who hail from states with more efficient mail-in voting systems have expressed fewer fears. First-year Tris Arthur said she is waiting for her official ballot but knows she’ll be able to send it back before Oct. 26, the recommended return date.

“Ohio’s pretty good with the mail-in voting system,” she said. “With everything

going on nationally, there is, of course, a bit of fear.”

Kimball had quick words of advice there: “Vote early. Get your ballot. Fill it in, and move on.”

Postal Failures The sad truth is that even if a student sends off their ballot signed, sealed, and delivered, uncertainty still awaits.

The USPS has suffered financially for years, but the coronavirus pandemic has wrought an existential threat to the agency. Recently, the presidential administration pushed to privatize the service, which has funded itself for years (and collected a considerable amount of debt along the way).

However, few students are sure what that threat means for the 2020 election.

The USPS has circulated millions of ballots seasonally for local, state, and national elections since the Civil War when mail-in voting began. There’s little chance that the department will disappear soon, but its competence has slowed in recent months, worrying voters and consumers alike.

“I can’t imagine what would happen if they

take that away, especially with elections because they are so dependent on the postal service,” Arthur said.

Kimball said issues with the system have been apparent for years but have been exacerbated by administrative and financial problems uncovered and re-analyzed this year. “Our mail system has some issues, he said. “I’ve seen ballots sitting on shelves for months before and not getting sent until after the election. It’s not perfect. ” Still, Kimball seemed assured your vote is likely to count, as long as you cast one.

“I’m confident that your vote will make it regardless of whether you vote on Election Day or if you mail it in,” he said. “For my evidence of this, we’re going to look at the primary...it had a record turnout, and to me, that’s an indication that our system works here in the state. You had more people voting than ever. If that’s the case, we’re moving in the right direction, despite living in a pandemic.”

Diti Kohli is the current Editor-in-Chief of The Berkeley Beacon and a junior studying journalism.

diti_kohli@emerson.edu

13

The Arts Voting deadlines for the top 10 states Emerson students live in

Register to vote by

Massachusetts California New York New Jersey Connecticut Florida Pennsylvania Texas New Hampshire Virginia

Oct. 24 Oct. 19 Oct. 9 Oct. 13 Oct. 27 Oct. 5 Oct. 19 Oct. 4 Oct. 21- 28 Oct. 12

Request ballot by

Nov. 2 Nov. 3 Oct. 27 Oct. 13 Nov. 2 (Mail only) Oct. 24 Oct. 27 Oct. 23 Oct. 27 Oct. 23

*Ballots must be received by the state by this date, not shipped out by then *Any dates highlighted in red means that deadline has already passed 14

Ballot received by*

Nov. 3 Nov. 20 Nov. 10 Nov. 10 Nov. 3 Nov. 3 Nov. 3 Nov. 4 Nov. 3 Nov. 6

The Arts

Editor-in-Chief for The Berkeley Beacon, Diti Kohli, reporting from a Trump rally in Londonderry, New Hampshire on Aug. 28, 2020.

Wish that were you? It can be!

Come work with us. Email us at Magazine@BerkeleyBeacon.com