Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Six things we must do to save our democracy and protect our elections in 2022

Opinion

Election workers

We must do more to protect frontline poll workers, writes Penniman.

Chen Mengtong/China News Service via Getty Images

As we turn the final pages on a tumultuous 2021, all this week The Fulcrum will share a year-end series of guest commentaries from a distinguished group of columnists on the current state of electoral reform and what we may expect in the upcoming year.

Penniman is the founder and CEO of Issue One, a crosspartisan political reform organization, and author of “Nation on the Take: How Big Money Corrupts Our Democracy and What We Can Do About It.”

Our democracy is under attack. The campaign to sow doubt in our elections and create distrust in our institutions is extremely motivated, and bad actors are gaining ground across the country.

This year alone, we saw 19 states enact new laws that will make it harder for Americans to vote, and several states placed election administration under greater partisan control. Barring federal action, we will see even more states in 2022 take steps to undermine the will of the people and set the stage for a constitutional crisis the likes of which we have never seen in our history.

That’s why Congress must act. Many common sense proposals — which benefit from a long history of bipartisanship and are supported by overwhelming majorities of Americans — have already been introduced. But Republicans in Congress have repeatedly filibustered these bills, going so far as to block debate on the very reforms needed to fix our broken political system.

We cannot allow this inaction to continue into next year. If we want to save our democracy, we must act now. As the leading crosspartisan political reform group in Washington, D.C., here’s what Issue One is focused on achieving in 2022.


Protect election officials and frontline poll workers

Our election officials and frontline poll workers have been facing death threats on a daily basis since the 2020 presidential election. These have been fueled by baseless claims of fraud despite former President Donald Trump’s own Department of Homeland Security, and attorney general, declaring the 2020 election safe and secure.

While the Department of Justice launched a task force earlier this year to investigate threats against election workers, there have been few arrests or criminal convictions, and many secretaries of state are frustrated that the task force hasn’t been deployed aggressively enough.

Our election officials are the embodiment of democracy in action — helping members of their communities register to vote, find their polling locations, cast their ballots and ensure that every vote is counted accurately. Many now live in fear, and states are bracing for mass retirements in the wake of these threats, which leaves positions open to extremists. As former Trump advisor Steve Bannon, a leader of the “Stop the Steal” movement, said last month, “We’re taking over all the elections.”

In addition to the DOJ stepping up its game, members of Congress should seek to pass bipartisan legislation protecting election officials from intimidation and threats of violence.

Prevent election administration from partisan takeover

We’ve seen a growing number of states move to strip local election officials of their power and place election oversight into the hands of partisan politicians. It’s difficult to interpret these laws as anything but election sabotage — an attempt to do what failed in 2020 by making it legal for politicians to toss out legitimate votes if they don’t like the outcome.

Principled Republicans, Democrats and independents must stand against this trend before it takes over not just purple states and red states but also blue states.

Make it easier for voters to securely cast their ballots

Even in the midst of a global pandemic, mail-in ballots, early voting and additional measures helped ensure that Americans were able to safely exercise their sacred freedom to vote.

What was the response in some states to this tremendous success? Making it harder to vote.

The massive disinformation campaign that Trump and many of his supporters continue to spread about the 2020 campaign has empowered lawmakers to roll back voting modalities they once championed — like mail-in voting.

And for what gain? In November’s gubernatorial election in Virginia, where steps have been taken in recent years to make voting more accessible, we saw how Republicans appear to have benefitted from some of the very proposals that have now stalled in Congress — including early voting, no-excuse absentee voting and automatic voter registration.

Passing the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act would at least empower the Department of Justice to take a closer look under the hoods of some of these laws and make sure they don’t discriminate against certain groups of voters. Congress has previously reauthorized the VRA on five separate occasions by overwhelming majorities of Republicans and Democrats since its original passage in 1965, and they should once again affirm that bipartisanship.

End hyper-partisan redistricting

We’ve all seen the classic examples of gerrymandering — zigzagging districts engineered down to partisan perfection. It’s a tried and true weapon that both political parties have mastered, long ago coming to the realization that the best way to win elections and hold onto power is to prevent races from becoming competitive in the first place.

It’s had a profound effect on the makeup of Congress: of the 435 seats in the House of Representatives, only 10 percent are considered up for grabs in next year’s midterm elections. Which means that 90 percent of House members need to worry mainly about getting through their primaries, either by raising so much money they prophylactically scare off competitors or by being so extreme that they cultivate the affinity of base voters.

When we talk about the dysfunctionality on Capitol Hill, we have to realize that it’s in large part the result of structural problems, and that many of those problems are fixable. Voters should pick their politicians, not the other way around. We must fix this undemocratic problem.

Update the Electoral Count Act

Our ability to elect a president and vice president fairly and peacefully every four years is

a hallmark of our democratic system. For over a century, the Electoral Count Act has governed this process and Congress’ role. But the 19th century law is outdated and rife with arcane language and ambiguities, opening the door to misinterpretations and exploitation.

It’s time for Congress to modernize this law, clarify the role of the vice president, rein in the objection process and prevent one party from attempting to overturn the will of the people.

We cannot leave this to chance. Both parties should work together to get this done and restore Americans’ trust in our democratic process.

Curb the spread of disinformation

Disinformation permeates every corner of our society. It fueled an attack on our nation’s Capitol and continues to run rampant across all forms of media, perpetuating lies about the election and other falsehoods.

Until we confront the harm disinformation is causing, it will be extremely difficult to accomplish any of the important reforms outlined above. We cannot hand the future of our country over to algorithms that distort the truth and allow lies to spread faster than real journalism.

Congress cannot let these platforms off the hook. Members from both parties have already expressed interest in bipartisan solutions following disturbing reports about the dangers facing young people. It is crucial that legislation also addresses the destructive power of disinformation.

Our broken political system — fueled by big money — has created an environment in which the vast majority of ordinary citizens today no longer have a seat at the table. 2022 must be the year we change course and fix this. The American people must have confidence in our democracy.


Read More

Democratic Presidential candidate U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) holds his first presidential campaign rally at Brooklyn College on March 02, 2019 in Brooklyn, New York.

A lobbyist who worked for both Bernie Sanders and Fortune 500 clients explains what democratic socialist wins mean for business, and how to prepare.

VIEW press/Getty Images

I Campaigned for Bernie Sanders Then Lobbied for Amazon

In 2016, my political outreach company, Firehouse Phones, worked on the presidential campaign of a democratic socialist. It was one of many campaigns my firm touched, but that one stays on my resume for a reason: it taught me more about how persuasion actually works than any client engagement before or since.

Today I run Ohio River South, a government affairs firm focused on the nation's fastest growing region — the American South. Over the past decade we've advocated for nearly two dozen Fortune 500 companies — Amazon in my earlier lobbying years, and later growing a client roster that included Alphabet, Microsoft, General Motors, United Healthcare, and Capital One. So when democratic socialists started winning and companies started calling to ask what it meant for them, I found myself in a useful position: I'm the advisor who has been on the other team.

Keep ReadingShow less
The White House
The white house with green lawn and trees
Photo by Josh on Unsplash

The Politics of Gratitude: Why Washington Punishes the Loyalty It Cannot Price

On a Sunday night in August, Senator Jon Ossoff told a campaign rally in Atlanta that President Trump would rather build his ballroom and “travel with Natalie” than do his job. He never used her last name. He did not need to. Natalie Harp, the White House aide known to colleagues as Trump’s “human printer” for trailing him with a portable printer and transcribing his social-media dictation, had become a punchline before most Americans knew who she was.

The backlash arrived within hours. White House officials accused Ossoff of insinuating an affair; Republican Rep. Brandon Gill noted that Harp survived bone cancer only because the Right to Try Act, which Trump signed in 2018, let her seek an experimental treatment outside the normal approval process, and dismissed any other reading of the moment as unfair. Weeks earlier, Harp had been at the center of a far more consequential story: in July, she was one of a handful of aides, alongside the defense secretary and two senior staffers, chosen to accompany Trump on a covert switch of aircraft as he left a security summit in Turkey after officials detected a credible Iranian threat, while most of the traveling delegation stayed behind on a decoy plane. That is the real proximity Ossoff's line was needling. Then came a detail that complicated the story further: Trump had personally given Harp and several other aides cash gifts of $45,000 apiece, which a former federal ethics official called troublesome, since money on that scale can leave a recipient feeling indebted to whoever signs the check.

Keep ReadingShow less
A map labeling Lake Ontario as "Lake America" is displayed behind U.S. President Donald Trump.

A map labeling Lake Ontario as "Lake America" is displayed as U.S. President Donald Trump signs an executive order during an event in the Oval Office of the White House on August 27, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Cartography of Convenience: Why Rushed Renaming Erodes Public Trust

In tough economic times, governments often reach for the easiest kind of progress: a new name on an old sign. Wage stagnation, inflation, crumbling roads, and rising rents are hard problems that take years and real money to fix. Renaming a street, a lake, or a strait is not. It costs a fraction as much and lets officials point to something they “did.” A new name never fixes a pothole or lowers a grocery bill. This year offered an unusually rich catalogue of the habit, reaching from a city council in Texas to a wartime waterway in the Persian Gulf.

A Concept Borrowed From the Cremation Ground

Indian philosophy has an old idea called shmashana vairagya, describing the sudden clarity a person feels standing at a cremation ground, when ordinary ambitions look small. The feeling fades once the mourner goes home. Public policy has its own version of this cycle. In the raw hours after a tragedy, a scandal, or a surge of national feeling, officials decide, sometimes within a single social media post, what belongs on a map or a sign forever. The emotion passes in hours. The bill, when there is one, stays for years.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump

U.S. President Donald Trump on February 6, 2026.

(Photo by Samuel Corum/Getty Images)

A Demagogue in the White House: Will the Guardrails Hold?

A demagogue does not seize all power at once. He takes it piece by piece.

In Trump’s second administration, those pieces accumulated in plain sight. The president generated so much disruption and noise that Americans struggled to keep pace. Each new controversy displaced the last, obscuring a more consequential story: the steady accumulation of presidential power.

Keep ReadingShow less