> I think it's reasonable to question how many ballots being sent to local county offices would cross paths with one of these five regional processing facilitie

> I think it's reasonable to question how many ballots being sent to local county offices would cross paths with one of these five regional processing facilities. It really depends on the details. Are those processing facilities serving urban areas of some swing states? Even if it's just 1% of the ballots, those ballots could be the ones that decide the election. > Even the Motherboard article acknowledges this; >> ...some of the DBCSs staying will have about 50 more stackers added to them, meaning the machines can sort mail to a larger number of destinations.... It's not that clear, that same article also says this: > The postal workers Motherboard spoke to said having machines removed, replaced, or modified is nothing new, but this time it seems to be more widespread, include a larger number of machines at their respective facility, and potentially impacts the facility’s ability to process large numbers of mail, including ballots, in a short time span. Given other statements made by this administration, people are right to be extremely skeptical of the motivations here. At a minimum the optics of making this change now are extremely bad. Even if there's a rational, honest reason for this change; the project should be postponed until December for that reason alone.