Postmaster General David Steiner defended a Postal Service proposal on June 24 that would require states to turn over mail voting lists and ballot barcode information, and warned that USPS would not deliver ballots in states that refuse. The plan would reach federal mail voting in any state that declined to comply.
The hearing put the Postmaster General Mail-in Ballots fight back in the spotlight because the proposal is tied to Donald Trump’s effort to tighten mail voting, and it would give the Postal Service new leverage over how ballots move through the mail. Steiner told senators the idea would make the system more efficient and match what many states already do, but the reaction from Democrats was immediate and sharp.
Under the plan, states would have to provide the USPS the names and barcodes tied to their mail-in ballots for federal elections, along with unique barcodes on the outbound and return ballot envelopes. The Postal Service said the barcode requirement would help determine adherence to federal law and aid law enforcement efforts, a standard the agency says would let it track whether ballot handling matches federal requirements.
That is exactly why Senator Gary Peters said the proposal would coerce states into handing over their absentee voter rolls or face the loss of vote-by-mail delivery. Senator Elissa Slotkin went further, saying Steiner was being used by Trump and arguing that the president does not believe elections he loses are valid. Their criticism came as all 47 Democratic senators sent a letter on Wednesday urging the Postal Service to drop the plan, calling it unconstitutional and illegal and accusing the White House and President Trump of trying to turn USPS into an election administration agency.
The fight sits on top of Trump’s March executive order aimed at severely restricting mail-in voting, and a U.S. judge said last week that Democratic-led states and voting rights groups could keep pursuing lawsuits challenging that order. The Postal Service has not said when it will decide whether to adopt the proposal, leaving states to guess whether the agency is preparing a rule or a threat.
