<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/1/1612041441098.png" alt="Rep. Bill Sutton, R-Gardner, testified Thursday on behalf of a bill limiting who may deliver advanced ballots on behalf of another. He said the bill would shore up any murky areas of Kansas election law. (Pool photo by Evert Nelson/Topeka Capital-Journal)" />
 <figcaption>Rep. Bill Sutton, R-Gardner, testified Thursday on behalf of a bill limiting who may deliver advanced ballots on behalf of another. He said the bill would shore up any murky areas of Kansas election law. (Pool photo by Evert Nelson/Topeka Capital-Journal)</figcaption>
 </figure>By NOAH TABORDA <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2021/01/29/kansas-legislators-consider-bills-to-amend-advanced-voting-laws-filling-vacancies/">Kansas Reflector</a>TOPEKA — Kansas 
legislators are weighing a bill limiting who can deliver an advance 
ballot on behalf of another person in an attempt to prevent potential 
“ballot harvesting.”Ballot harvesting is when a
 third party collects a large number of ballots and submits them to the 
election office. President Donald Trump often pointed to the practice 
among his baseless claims of voter fraud during the 2020 election.The practice is not 
illegal under state law unless another election crime is committed, such
 as voter fraud. If passed, however, the legislation being considered by
 lawmakers would limit those who may deliver advance ballots on 
another’s behalf to family or a caretaker.<a href="http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2021_22/measures/hb2054/">The bill</a>
 mirrors legislation introduced during the legislative session last 
year, where it passed out of committee but was never heard by the entire
 body.Rep. Bill Sutton, 
R-Gardner, said the election went smoothly in Kansas but changes were 
needed to tighten any loopholes in election law.“We just need to be able 
to affirm to our voters that in Kansas their election is absolutely 
legitimate,” Sutton said. “We saw what happens when, across the country,
 people questioned the legitimacy of their voting.”Sutton, one of two 
proponents — both state representatives — testified Thursday before the 
House Elections Committee and said the law would prevent any future 
wrongdoing. Opponents who testified said the bill was searching for a 
problem that did not exist and would only open the state to future 
litigation and court costs.While Sutton said he was 
not aware of any examples of ballot harvesting in Kansas, he compared 
the practice to electioneering, which is banned at polling places. He 
said the law would make it significantly harder to pressure a person 
into voting one way or another.Rep. Vic Miller, D-Topeka, said it was already a felony to influence someone else to change their vote.“Are you familiar with 
anyone that wants to take the chance of serving months in prison to 
alter a person’s vote?” Miller asked Sutton. “I’ve never met someone who
 was willing to take that risk for a vote.”If passed, any violators 
of the proposed election law would be charged with a felony. The 
legislation does not detail who is to be considered family or a 
caregiver.Kendall Seal, director of 
advocacy for the American Civil Liberties Union of Kansas, said this 
bill was an example of overreach that would merely disenfranchise voters
 and lead to more nonviolent criminals in the criminal justice system.“This bill makes felons 
out of neighbors helping neighbors,” Seal said. “It will criminalize 
volunteers from community service organizations and nonprofits helping 
to get out the vote.”Several critics echoed 
Seal’s assertion that the proposed law would suppress the vote. It is 
common practice for disabled people, senior citizens and those lacking 
transportation to seek assistance from a neighbor, friend or others to 
deliver their ballot.Turning a practice that 
has been legal for decades into a felony would result in many 
law-abiding Kansans having their right to vote stripped and their 
criminal record tarnished, said Davis Hammet, president of Loud Light. 
He said the bill was seeking to address a problem that current election 
law already covers.“This is really a solution
 in search of a problem, a problem that doesn’t exist here,” Hammet 
said. “So, in essence, it is voter suppression in search of some kind of
 justification. There’s no justification for this.”The House Elections Committee also heard brief testimony on a <a href="http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2021_22/measures/hb2051/">second bill altering how vacancies are filled</a> for the positions of the insurance commissioner and state treasurer.Under current law, if 
either position should become vacant before the end of the specified 
term, the governor would fill that position. This has occurred several 
times in recent Kansas history, as previous treasurers — U.S. Rep. Ron 
Estes, former U.S. Rep Lynn Jenkins and most recently U.S. Rep. Jake 
LaTurner — have left their post to run for Congress.The proposed change would 
place authority to fill the vacancy into the hands of delegates across 
the state from the party of the departing officeholder.The bill comes a month after <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2020/12/10/kelly-picks-her-lieutenant-governor-to-be-kansas-state-treasurer/">Gov. Laura Kelly chose then-Lt. Gov. Lynn Rogers</a>, a Democrat, to fill the vacancy left by LaTurner, a Republican.Testifying to the 
committee, Kansas Republican Party chairman Mike Kuckelman said the 
measure would better address voter intent than current law does.“The voters voted for a 
person to occupy the office, but many of us voters do that because of 
the political party, because of what the person stands for, because of 
the agenda,” Kuckelman said.Rep. Brett Parker, D-Overland Park, believed that mentality to be presumptuous of the voter’s true intent.“I think it’s true some 
voters vote based on party. I just don’t think we should set policies 
specifically to accommodate one set of voters and not the other,” Parker
 said.

Kan. legislators consider bills to amend advance voting laws, filling vacancies