|
Op-Ed: Has the Left changed the way you
vote?
[The Center Square] Todd Carney |
RealClearWire
Over the last year, the
debate over elections and voting rights has been poisoned by
name-calling and conspiracy theories, distracting from the legitimate
issues concerning America’s large and complex election system. That the
U.S. is a union of 50 states complicates matters further. The 50 states
are supposed to serve as “laboratories of democracy” in a wide range of
areas, but the area where such experiments are perhaps most
consequential is elections. When a swing state like Pennsylvania decides
to change how it conducts its elections, that change can affect the
country. What one state implements today, other states might soon adopt,
too. |
|
 These realities raise questions about how our elections should
be run and the impact of different election policies on the national and state
level. Hans von Spakovsky and John Fund’s new book, "Our Broken Elections: How
the Left Changed the Way You Vote" (Encounter, 2021), seeks to answer these
questions by providing a comprehensive overview of elections in the U.S.,
discussing potential ways to fix them, and warning about the risk of new
election policies that could do more harm than good.
The authors are admittedly conservative, but they do an admirable job of cutting
through the rhetoric on both sides. They reject right-wing conspiracy theories,
such as those raised by Rudy Giuliani, Lin Wood, Sidney Powell, Newsmax, and One
American News. They also rightfully question – and disprove – some of the Left’s
election-related arguments, such as its claim that there is no meaningful voter
fraud or that voter ID laws suppress minority voters.
Fund and von Spakovsky have a strong hold on history. Arguments about election
fraud long predate 2020 or 2016. The book discusses in detail, for example, the
1997 Miami mayoral election, where widespread absentee-ballot fraud altered the
results. The Miami Herald won a Pulitzer Prize for its reporting on the scandal.
The authors avoid partisan mudslinging. They do not claim that only Democrats
commit voter fraud – they describe, for instance, how a Republican candidate for
the House nearly won his race through absentee-ballot fraud. Their argument,
then, is not that only liberals cheat in elections, but that the circumstances
liberals favor for voting create more chances for fraud. Anyone can take
advantage of these conditions in elections.
The book makes a rigorous assessment of major issues affecting
voting policies, many not well known. The name Marc Elias, for example, may be
familiar only to readers who spend a lot of time on Twitter. Few realize that
Elias is a lawyer who essentially controls Democratic election litigation, and
that some of his past behavior has been ethically dubious. He faced sanctions
from the Fifth Circuit over filing conduct.
Moreover, Fund and von Spakovsky shed light on the recent revelation that Mark
Zuckerberg donated $350 million to a nonprofit, the Center for Tech and Civic
Life, to give out grants to election offices across the nation. Some of these
donations were used to boost turnout in Democratic strongholds, such as
Philadelphia. Zuckerberg’s spending deserves more attention than the media has
given it, especially considering the scrutiny of conservative donors such as the
Koch brothers. And unlike the Super PACs that have received so much negative
attention, Zuckerberg’s donations went directly to government offices in charge
of voting.
[to top of second column] |
Additionally, the book looks at plausible ways that
certain decisions could have affected the 2020 election. As noted
above, the authors do not buy into conspiracy theories. Instead,
they look at policies such as no-excuse absentee voting, allowing
ballots received after Election Day to be counted, and the use of
ballot drop-boxes, among others. The book goes into detail about how
these policies may violate election laws or the Constitution and
could compromise the integrity of elections.
Fund and von Spakovsky conclude by offering recommendations for
change. They stress the importance of up-to-date voter rolls, Voter
ID laws, election observers, and preventing state officials from
circumventing election laws. They believe that these remedies can
both fix longstanding problems and pare back what they see as too
much change in the elections of 2020.
Fund and von Spakovsky could have explained more
why Voter ID is needed. They are effective in showing why some
left-wing critiques of Voter ID fall flat, but less so in proving
why Voter ID would be a powerful deterrent to fraud. Most of the
examples of voter fraud they cite involve absentee ballots; it’s not
clear how Voter ID would address those issues.
Similarly, though, they gave an example of Republicans cheating in
elections, they could have fleshed out further how the problematic
policies they describe can be abused by either party. Doing so would
have further underscored how this is not really a partisan issue –
it’s about election integrity. As seen with the filibuster,
presidential executive orders, and other institutional changes,
either side can take advantage of potential weaknesses in the
system.
"Our Broken Elections: How the Left Changed the Way You Vote" offers
readers a robust analysis of U.S. voting laws, one that goes well
beyond the scope of recent debates. The debate over election laws
needs more voices like those of Fund and von Spakovsky.
Todd Carney is a writer based in Washington, DC. The views in this
piece are his alone and do not reflect the views of his employer.
 |
