The Left Is Attempting To Take Over Local Election Offices

Democrats have been on a swing-state crusade to rid election boards of anyone who is more concerned with the fairness and accuracy of our elections than with making sure the Democrat comes out on top. The left’s strategy is predictable yet effective. Utilizing a sophisticated information campaign that includes law articles, op-eds, boots-on-the-ground activism, and large amounts of funding from a handful of elite megadonors, the crusade targets GOP candidates at the local level, as Politico recently reported.

The assault seeks to guarantee a Democrat victory regardless of the outcome. Activist groups armed with millions in dark money promote down-ballot candidates and pop-up, astroturfed organizations, all run and funded by the same entities, with the goal of unseating Republican candidates who champion election integrity. These same groups work to make election boards a toothless rubber stamp on election results, regardless of glaring irregularities or inconsistencies in the process.

Their efforts follow a well-established pattern. For years, the left covertly poured millions into district attorney races, engaging in what Politico called a “quiet overhaul of the U.S. Justice System.” The strategy was clear: Pick the prosecutor. Pick what’s prosecuted.

Now a similar tactic is being redeployed in swing states like Georgia with a new target: election boards and election administrators. Organizations such as the Brennan Center for Justice, Protect Democracy, Democracy Fund, and Informing Democracy, bankrolled by billionaires like Pierre Omidyar and George Soros, are pouring in money and resources, attempting yet another takeover.

For context, the electoral process normally works like this: citizens cast their ballots, ballots are then counted, and after that, the ballots are canvassed. Then the election board certifies that the election has been properly executed and officially declares the winner. Depending on the state, election boards have broad control of polling locations, counting, curing, auditing votes, and certifying elections.

At first glance, changing election procedures appears innocuous enough. Each small shift on its own appears mundane and filled with bureaucratic-sounding balderdash, but make no mistake; these shifts have multiple opportunities to advantage one candidate or party over another.

One clear example of how a small rule change can have a large impact is the selection of polling stations. Research shows a strong relationship between distance from polling locations and the likelihood of voting. In short, picking polling locations means picking the voters. These left-leaning organizations’ current target seems similarly mundane: automatic certification.

Our elections can be automatic or certified — but they can’t be both. Certification means to attest, to verify, from old French, to make certain. Automatic means nearly the opposite, done instantly or spontaneously “without conscious thought.” Proponents of automatic verification claim that an election board’s duty to certify races is purely ministerial, treating the task as a formality. As a result, board members can’t delay certifying an election even if election procedures are not followed.

Automatic certification could prevent election officials from ensuring that all legal votes are counted. This would be a significant loss of control for local officials in investigating and regulating their elections. Election boards must have the power to follow state-mandated election procedures.

Local officials play a critical role in ensuring that every legal vote is counted and scrutinizing potential irregularities. Adherence to state-mandated procedures such as discretionary certification and verifying results could help maintain public trust at a time when faith in our elections is at an all-time low.

To be clear, discretionary certification doesn’t mean election boards should stop certification based on accounts of fraud in other parts of the state, as Cochise County in Arizona did in 2022. Nor does it mean delaying certification because of partisan interests. Rather, it’s about empowering election officials to do the work of verifying the results. Unfortunately, as Julie Adams, a member of the Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections, found out, sometimes you have to sue the state just to do your job.

The push for automatic certification is especially unusual, particularly because the Democrat Party in 2018 in Georgia wanted a federal court to reopen certification. Why would they want to eliminate this safeguard against errors now?

The solution is common-sense reforms focused on ensuring only eligible citizens can vote and that each of their votes gets counted. To do so, our policies must clarify our electoral process, as well as cement the safeguards that keep our democracy free and fair, while protecting local control that creates the intricate levels of integrity that guarantee every valid ballot gets counted.

If not, Americans will be subject to another left-wing overhaul. This time, instead of the justice system and district attorneys, it will be the electoral system and local election boards. Their strategy appears to be simple: Make the rules. Decide the game.

Ben Crockett is a research associate at the Texas Public Policy Foundation.