The following is an extract from our short explainer “Things You Might Not Know About Elections.” You can find the entire explainer here: https://cffad.org/things-you-might-not-know-about-elections/
In the previous weeks, we have covered (1) how elections are essential to your freedom and prosperity, (2) how and why elections can take many forms, and (3) how choices made by our state legislatures and local election administrators can encourage trust or distrust. Last week, we looked at the evidence for election fraud, and found it has been consequential only for some local elections. This week, we will some other threats to election integrity.
Threats to Election Integrity
There are currently four big threats to our elections. One is disinformation. Another is violence. Another comes from candidates and supporters who find ways to bend or break the rules with the hope of winning. The fourth comes from candidates and supporters who are unwilling to accept any election they lose.
Disinformation: Any election can lose its legitimacy if enough people have doubts that it was not conducted in a free and fair manner. Such doubts can be created by spreading false news about various election-related scandals. This psychology has been used by political parties and candidates who cannot accept losing. The tactic is especially potent when voters are highly polarized and already suspicious of each other – or in combination with cyber campaigns meant to create such polarization. Disinformation has also been used by foreign powers who wish to weaken the political cohesion of various countries. There is strong evidence, for example, that Russia, Iran, and China have engaged in such operations in many Western democracies, including the United States.
Violence: Election violence is probably as old as elections. For example, from about 200 BC, Roman elections were marred by political violence. Gang leaders linked to politicians would intimidate voters, and they often turned Rome into a battleground. There were very few safeguards, and there was also a lot of vote-buying. There have been some dramatic incidents of election violence in the U.S. In the Bloody Monday riot of 1855, members of the “no-nothings” violently blocked Catholic immigrants from Ireland and Germany from voting. In 1920, at least 30 Black residents of Ocoee, Florida, were massacred for participating or attempting to participate in the general election. Election results can also bring violence. The 1874 Battle of Liberty Place, or Battle of Canal Street, in New Orleans was an attempted insurrection following the disputed governor’s race of 1872. Most recently, allegations of electoral fraud led several thousand people to breach the U.S. Capitol, some violently, on January 6, 2021.
Bending or breaking the rules: In cases where a party has enough power, they can pervert the electoral system for their own gain. This has been true throughout history. Parties in power can make it harder for the opposition to register to vote. They can do that by reducing the number of polling stations and putting them far away. They can make it easier to reject votes coming from voting districts dominated by their opposition. They can make it easier to reject votes submitted by methods believed to be dominated by their opposition – such as vote by mail. They can also try to manipulate the way votes are counted. Ballots from opposition districts might get “lost,” or ballot stuffing might overwhelm opposition votes. They could also lessen or ignore voter registration requirements in order to allow more people to vote that might agree with their party – although this policy risks allowing more who would disagree as well.
As noted in Days 6 & 7, these sorts of problems have become very rare due to election reform laws, well-constructed procedures, and more scrutiny from all interested parties.
Yet, vote counting can still be a partisan affair. In the 2000 presidential election, partisans fought in the courts over whether to include or exclude poorly recorded votes (the so-called “hanging chads”). See one recounting of that legal battle from History.com here. In the 2020 election, partisans in some states fought over whether to count mail-in ballots, with the worry that one side might be advantaged by such ballots. The 2020 election included another vote-counting battle, this time associated with the Electoral College. Some partisans asserted that the Vice President’s role of presiding over the electoral count (set out in the Twelfth Amendment) was not ceremonial and that the Vice President had the power to invalidate millions of votes. There was no legal or historical backing to this, but because it would benefit one side’s preferred candidate, it received support from some legislators. The Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022 helps clarify how the process should work.
Most election interference is more subtle than directly altering ballots. Far more common are “soft” methods of interference. These can include things such as deliberately spreading misinformation – also referred to as “fake news.” American politicians have engaged in fake news from the earliest days of the Republic. Foreign governments have joined in from time to time, including the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections. Another technique is deliberately timing events so as to affect an election. Because these events don’t attack elections themselves, defenses against them must also involve more than just election planning. The defense against these measures is part of greater civic culture. That participation in civics is why we are all here in the first place! This effort is a work in progress, something that all of us can continue to work on.
Not all malicious actors come from abroad, however. The recent rise of American anti-electoralism is a pernicious threat that requires a more powerful defensive effort from American voters.
Refusing Defeat: The foundation of our Republic is the regular opportunity for citizens to hold their executives and representatives accountable through elections. In Federalist 39, Madison defines a republic this way, “we may define a republic to be, or at least may bestow that name on, a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure, for a limited period, or during good behavior.” In 1801, Thomas Jefferson wrote, “and the elective franchise, if guarded as the ark of our safety, will peaceably dissipate all combinations to subvert a constitution dictated by the wisdom, & resting on the will of the people. That will is the only legitimate foundation of any government, and to protect its free expression should be our first object.” Part of the genius of our political system is that losing should never be a disaster: losing candidates and parties can always run again, over and over, so long as everyone is willing to uphold the system. This is why it is so troubling when some candidates for governor, Senate, and House in the United States have started refusing to agree in advance that they will accept their own election results. They will uphold the system only if they win. Americans need to adapt to this new internal threat and develop new methods to address it.
If you want to learn more about elections, we have a 9-part course, each part is a 20-minute read. Easy! Click here: https://cffad.org/things-you-might-not-know-about-elections/
