Dogs Don’t Vote
By Stephanie Pierotti
Dogs don't vote. There are no documented cases of dogs voting, and most people would probably assume that dogs don't vote. However, Republicans have been pushing conspiracy theories about dogs voting for decades, with President Trump recently reviving them as part of his campaign against mail-in voting. Missouri Senator Kit Bond famously championed this theory on the floor of the senate during the debate on the Help America Vote Act of 2002(HAVA). No one has ever been able to explain how dogs would register, or acquire proper identification to actually vote in any election. Although we can safely assume dogs will not be perpetrating voter fraud, it does not mean that elections are safe from manipulation. Republicans use the narrative of individual ballot fraud in order to prevent thousands of legal voters from even casting ballots.
The notion of fraudulent elections depends greatly on your conception of fraud. It could be argued that fraudulent voting is commonplace, but in practice this fraud would not necessarily impact the outcome of the election. In the United States there are only a few examples of truly fraudulent outcomes in elections, although the further you go back in history the harder it is to verify. It is rarely the case that individual voters casting illegal ballots are determining the outcome in any election, but rather the people in charge of running elections perpetrating fraud that determine the outcome. There are three main ways that elections are tampered with, which all fall somewhat under a vague umbrella of legality - meaning they are not necessarily even considered fraud. The first is limiting voter eligibility or preventing voters from casting ballots. The second is destroying, invalidating, or simply not counting ballots that have been cast. The third is using ballots that are intentionally designed to subvert the voters intended vote, which is either accomplished by complicated wording or counterintuitive layout and directions. There are certainly additional factors that could skew the outcome of an election, including those outlined in the Justice Department’s Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election, but the actions of the Trump 2016 Campaign still remain an outlier in recent political history.
Many elections are won by a large enough margin that fraud is inconsequential to the outcome. Tampering simply could not generate a large enough effect to make it a worthwhile endeavor, although that doesn’t mean that people don’t still try it. In both 2008 and 2012, Barack Obama won the presidency by a margin large enough that the outcome in any one swing state would not have affected the election’s outcome. However, there have been two extremely close presidential elections this century that were impacted by all three means of vote tampering listed above. We are now heading into a presidential election that will certainly be close enough to swing based on tampering, especially considering the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on voter turnout across the country.
***
The 2000 presidential election was one of the closest elections in the history of the United States. Governor George Bush defeated Vice-President Gore by only five votes in the electoral college with Gore carrying the popular vote by half a million votes. The election was ultimately decided by the voters of the state of Florida - with almost four million ballots cast, Bush won by only 537 votes. The margin was close enough for a recount, followed by a lengthy series of court battles framed by contentious arguments that played out in the media. The election was ultimately concluded, more than a month after voting took place, by a 5-4 Supreme Court decision handing the presidency to Bush that fell along ideological lines. An extremely convoluted series of events leading up to, and then after the election in Florida, has made it difficult to determine if the court arrived at the correct outcome.
Florida already had a dubious recent history with election fraud, and concerns were brought forward well before any ballots were cast. Twice in the 1990s mayoral elections were overturned because of fraud committed by campaign workers, including the use of absentee ballots. One of the results of this was a major purge of the voting rolls, eliminating 173,000 voters right before the 2000 election. The stated intent was to remove deceased persons and felons, but this also resulted in the removal of legal voters with similar names. This action disproportionately affected Black voters, and resulted in people turning up to the polls only to be denied a ballot. In addition, the worst resources and equipment were used at polling places in communities of color, resulting in a greater number of ballots being disqualified over technicalities. These issues were common within communities of color and there were calls for investigation before polls even closed on the day of the election. The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights(USCCR) completed an extensive investigation into the election and issued a comprehensive report. In its conclusion it stated “Despite the closeness of the election, it was widespread voter disenfranchisement, not the dead-heat contest, that was the extraordinary feature in the Florida election. The disenfranchisement was not isolated or episodic. And state officials failed to fulfill their duties in a manner that would prevent this disenfranchisement.” It is impossible to know exactly how many votes were lost from the systemic suppression of the Black vote, but it is safe to assume that it impacted more than 537 people.
In the two decades since the 2000 election there has been a desperate war fought between the two political parties over voting rights. For the most part, the Republican Party has been successful at making voting more difficult, especially for minority groups. The USCCR report on the 2000 election cites multiple violations of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which was created to ensure equal access to the vote but has slowly been rolled back through a series of Supreme Court cases. Since the Supreme Court ruling on Shelby County v. Holder in 2013, 23 states have created new obstacles for voting according to the nonpartisan coalition Election Protection. Many state governments have made ID requirements more stringent, and frequently resources and equipment are not consistent across all communities. Then there are broader systemic issues affecting access to the vote, such as voting taking place on Tuesdays mostly during working hours. At its inception, only a small minority of the population could vote, white property owning men over the age of 21, with some states enforcing additional restrictions, such as being Christian. In the first presidential election only an estimated 1.8% of the population cast a ballot, and some states didn’t even have a presidential popular vote of any kind until after the Civil War. Over the last 230 years the right to vote has expanded, but with states largely able to create their own rules, there have been efforts to restrict access to the vote throughout with tools such as literacy tests or poll taxes. No statistic encapsulates this continued struggle more than voter turnout. In 2000 only 51.21% of the voting age population participated in the election, and in 2016 only 55.67% voted. With barely half the population turning out for elections, the focus of government should be to increase access and make voting easier, not restricting participation.
***
***
The slight margin of victory in the 2000 election opened the door for a recount. Initially the Gore campaign sought a recount only in the four counties that had a high volume of Democratic voters. The Republican party filed suit to stop the recount, but the Florida courts eventually decided upon a statewide recount of all votes. That recount was never completed because the Supreme Court decision on Bush v. Gore stopped it. The recount itself was plagued with issues, starting with the person in charge of certifying the election. The Florida Secretary of State, Kathleen Harris, was also co-chair of the Florida Bush Campaign, and the Governor of the state was George W Bush’s brother. Governor Jeb Bush did his best, at least publicly, to distance himself from the recount, while Kathleen Harris attempted to certify the election results as quickly as possible, which the courts in Florida prevented. Kathleen Harris was elected to Congress two years later, and would run for the U.S. Senate in 2006 before a bribery scandal would derail her political rise. The Bush Campaign legal team in Florida was led by James Baker, who had served in both the Reagan and H.W. Bush White Houses, and included Roger Stone, who focused on spreading disinformation and manipulating the media frenzy surrounding the recount. In 2019, the Special Counsel Investigation into the 2016 election led to Roger Stone’s conviction for making false statements to investigators and witness tampering. Although President Trump commuted the sentences of all seven felonies this past July.
Florida counties had no uniform policy or procedure for completing a recount. The ballots themselves proved to be an obstacle in completing the recount. Ballots were not uniform from county to county, some ballots were punched on defective or poorly maintained machines, and a high number of votes were tossed out without uniform criteria for a valid ballot. Most common of these was the “hanging chad” from punch votes that were not completely punched through, but there were a variety of other factors causing votes to be disqualified.
GREG LOVETT/GETTY IMAGES
Sifting through these controversial ballots required observers from both political parties, including John Bolton, another Reagan-era Republican that would later serve under both H.W. and G.W. Bush, and Trump. This process intentionally dragged out the recount as long as possible, so the Republicans could get the Federal Courts to intervene. The ballots themselves were confusing for voters, which led to a statistically improbable number of votes for third party candidate Pat Buchanan, as well as many ballots that accidentally had votes for multiple presidential candidates. Despite extensive research into the ballots, ultimately we don’t have a satisfying or conclusive answer because both political parties, and ultimately the Supreme Court, acted rashly to conclude the election as opposed to determining the actual will of the people. Depending on which votes are deemed valid you can arrive at either a Bush or Gore victory.
Using the most inclusive acceptable definitions of a valid vote based on Florida law in a statewide recount, Gore would have won Florida by 107 votes. If the Gore Campaign had pushed for a full recount from the outset, and if it had proceeded without interference from the media and both political parties, Gore could very well have become President.
In the aftermath of the 2000 election Congress passed HAVA. This legislation sought to replace many of the outdated voting machines that were used in 2000, established baseline standards for federal elections, and created an Election Assistance Commission to help oversee this process. Ultimately the 2000 election made voting better in this country, but we are still plagued by those who oversee the electoral process attempting to manipulate the outcomes of our elections. Despite this, another controversial series of events unfolded four years later with many of the same issues recurring. The 2004 election was projected to be very close, and Ohio was one of the states that would likely determine the outcome. Ohio’s 20 electoral votes would have won the election for Senator John Kerry, but he would end up losing the state by 120,000 votes. The Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell was sued heading into the election because of a controversial policy mandating some voters cast provisional ballots, which was in violation of the new rules under HAVA. The courts would eventually reverse portions of Blackwell’s policy before the election took place, but many voters who were forced to cast a provisional ballot did not have their votes counted.
On election day, some voters found that they had been removed from the voting rolls, most of them from Black communities, democratic precincts lacked staff and equipment to support turnout, and 93,000 ballots were deemed invalid for various reasons and were not counted. Blackwell refused to participate in an investigation by the U.S. House Committee for the Judiciary, but the Democratic Staff of the Committee issued a comprehensive report titled “What Went Wrong In Ohio” which outlined multiple issues with his office’s handling of the 2004 election. Blackwell was not surprisingly also a co-chair for the Bush-Cheney campaign in Ohio, and owned stock in Diebold, who manufactured voting machines that his office purchased. Franklin County Board of Elections Director Matt Damschroder later admitted to accepting a $10,000 check from Diebold on behalf of the county Republican Party. Damschroder would later go on to serve as the Ohio Assistant Secretary of State presiding over elections statewide. Ohio State Senator Jeff Jacobsen asked Blackwell to disqualify Diebold as a voting machine provider in 2003 because of security issues with their software. Blackwell opted for touch screen machines from Diebold that would not produce a paper audit trail reversing a previous decision by state lawmakers. During his time in office he would be sued more than sixteen times over the handling of state elections. Diebold voting machines were plagued with operation and security issues, and were sued by Cuyahoga County in Cleveland, by Democrat Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Bruenner, and the Securities and Exchange Commission, all of which were settled out of court.
***
The 2020 election is less than three months away, and in addition to the factors already discussed, many local governments have not prepared for how the coronavirus pandemic will impact the election. There is no greater factor in the outcome of an election than turnout. Strong turnout could generate a margin of victory for Biden similar to Obama in 2008 and 2012, that would be large enough to overwhelm any malevolent interference. However, Republicans have spent years making voting increasingly difficult, and there are currently lawsuits in several swing states attempting to force the removal of hundreds of thousands of names from the voting rolls. We are now faced with a federal election that may be conducted largely through the mail, and the Republican party is currently engaged in lawsuits across the country in an attempt to limit mail-in voting in any way they can, but so far courts have largely been supportive of expanded mail-in voting. This has led to the duality of the President spreading conspiracy theories about voting by mail, while simultaneously his campaign is mailing out absentee ballot applications.
It’s important for everyone to stay safe, and that may mean voting by mail makes the most sense, but everyone should make themselves familiar with how those votes are collected and counted in your city and state. Both political parties are going to fight tooth and nail over the specifics of expanded voting by mail, and will likely try to manipulate the process to their advantage. I have voted by mail several times, but depending on where you are, it may be better to vote in person. Many states have early in-person voting, which would certainly be safer for those with health concerns. Additionally, always read the instructions on your ballot carefully to ensure you don’t accidentally invalidate your vote, especially if you’re voting in an unfamiliar way. Opting for a paper ballot at the polls is advisable especially in states where digital machines have no paper trail to audit. If possible, volunteering to work the polls would be beneficial as there will likely be poll worker shortages. Democratic precincts are often densely populated making them more susceptible to shortages in staff and equipment.
Some Advice for Secure Voting
If you vote by mail, become familar with how those votes are collected and counted in your city and state.
Drop off your ballot in a secure ballot box rather than mailing.
If you plan to vote in-person, try to use early in-person options.
Read your ballot carefully to ensure you don’t accidentally invalidate your vote!
Opt for a paper ballot when voting in-person.
Help friends and family navigate voting procedures and/or help them get to the polls.
Volunteer to work the polls.
There are already investigations in congress over potential manipulation of the mail system headed into this fall’s election. Hopefully congress can allocate funds to both support the postal system, and make the necessary changes to help counties make voting in person as safe and accurate as possible. Everyone should be mindful of who the Secretary of State is in your state, because Kathleen Harris and Ken Blackwell aren’t the only corrupt figures to run statewide elections. Importantly, don’t think this is only limited to Republicans.The 2000 election showed that neither party was really dedicated to arriving at the will of the voters, but simply trying to engineer a victory for their candidate. While this has always been true, the 2016 presidential election went far beyond anything the country has seen since Watergate.
The investigation into President Trump’s 2016 campaign resulted in 34 convictions, including Michael Flynn, Rick Gates, and Rick Manafort, who were all part of the Trump Campaign. Michael Cohen and Roger Stone were also convicted, although they were not official members of his campaign. The actions of Stone and the rest of Trump’s inner circle have demonstrated that he is willing to do whatever it takes to win, including bribery, collaborating with criminals and even courting support from foreign powers. There is no doubt that the Trump campaign will not only push the limits of what is acceptable, but push beyond them in any way they believe they can get away with. Trump has repeatedly violated the law since coming into office, and doubts that as President he can even be convicted of a crime. He has courted foreign interference, as his campaign did in 2016, and republicans have been working to make voting harder since the last election. The President has already floated the idea of postponing the election, and cast doubt on the legitimacy of our electoral process. Trump has a long history of litigation from well before he ever became President, which raises the spectre of another court battle in the case that election results are close.
Despite what the current media narrative is, the election is going to be close. Since the 2000 election the electoral map has remained largely unchanged, with the blocks of states voting consistently for the same political party, and only a handful of swing states. The current construction of the map favors Republican candidates, and the electoral college itself is designed to sway electoral power away from population centres. Furthermore, the nature of the democratic electorate having so many densely populated precincts means that tampering in only a few places can alter a statewide election easily. In the absurdity of our electoral process, a couple counties in a couple of states really determine the outcome for the entire country. This is exactly what happened in 2000, and when the election is that close it only takes a few fingers on the scale to shift the outcome.
***
Additional Resources:
“The Dirty Trickster” - New Yorker on Roger Stone
After Bush v. Gore: 2000 Election Documentary - The New York Times
How To Vote In The 2020 Election - FiveThirtyEight
The Bush-Gore Recount Is an Omen for 2020 - The Atlantic