Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Foreign interference in our elections is an American crisis

Foreign interference in our elections is an American crisis

The Honest Ads Act, introduced by Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Sen. Mark Warner, would directly counter the tactics used throughout the 2016 election that led to more than 126 million Americans consuming disinformation. writes McGehee

Drew Angerer/Getty Images

McGehee is executive director of Issue One, a cross-partisan political reform group. (It is incubating, but journalistically independent from, The Fulcrum.) She leads its Don't Mess With US project to stop foreign interference in our elections.

The debate around election security has been fierce and full of misinformation in recent days. Now that it's circled all the way back around to the cable news and pundit class, it is time to clear the air around what's quickly devolved into a partisan, points-scoring exercise.

Foreign interference is a national crisis, and stopping foreign interference is about the integrity of our elections, not political wins.

Remember: Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and others don't see political party; they see weaknesses and vulnerabilities to exploit and divide our nation. An attack on one of us is an attack on all of us, and we need a strong and unified response because they are working to weaken America as we speak. This impacts all of us.


So here are the facts. More than 120 million Americans saw disinformation spread by the Russians in 2016. They targeted election systems in all 50 states and hacked the voting databases in Florida and Illinois, stole personal information on 500,000 U.S. voters and were positioned to manipulate voter registration data. Foreign cyberattacks undermined candidates in both parties in the past election cycle — Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham, Hillary Clinton and more — and foreign operatives tried to impersonate candidates for office. The heads of the intelligence and national security communities have repeatedly emphasized that foreign attacks are stemming from Russia and other countries including China, Iran, and North Korea.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

While some states are moving ahead with their own election security efforts, at least 10 secretaries of state, from both parties, have been pleading for more money to help protect their election systems in 2020 and beyond. That's because while they don't need Washington telling them how to run their elections, these states want more resources and training. Chris Krebs, director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, previewed this problem for a House Appropriations subcommittee when he said this of the Russian government: "I know what they did in '16. I know what they tried to do in '18. What will they do in 2020? That's what keeps me up at night."

Republicans and Democrats in Congress get this. There are a handful of bipartisan bills in the House and Senate, sponsored by members of the Intelligence committees, that would serve to directly plug loopholes in our elections that foreign actors are looking to exploit in 2020 and beyond: The Secure Elections Act would help better safeguard our political system while reaffirming each state's role in administering federal elections; the Honest Ads Act would directly counter the tactics used throughout the 2016 election that led to more than 126 million Americans consuming disinformation; the DETER Act would sanction countries found to be interfering in our elections; the Foreign Agents Disclosure and Registration Enhancement Act would modernize and enforce lobbying laws on the books and impose real penalties for rule breakers; the Shell Company Abuse Act would stop foreigners from using tax loopholes to engage in illegal political activity.

These are just five important steps Congress could take immediately to prevent foreign disruption in our political system.

There is no silver bullet to election security but we have to take action now. That's why Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a staunch opponent of security measures that would "federalize" elections, has begun to change his tune and has expressed openness to compromise. That is positive.

This is not about 2016. It's about 2020, 2022 and every election beyond. No foreign power should be able to interfere with our elections and how we choose our leaders. This is America and we must protect our sacred electoral process. It's time for Congress to place the needs of the country over allegiance to their political parties.

Read More

One Lesson from the Elections: Looking At Universal Voting

A roll of "voted" stickers.

Pexels, Element5 Digital

One Lesson from the Elections: Looking At Universal Voting

The analysis and parsing of learned lessons from the 2024 elections will continue for a long time. What did the campaigns do right and wrong? What policies will emerge from the new arrangements of power? What do the parties need to do for the future?

An equally important question is what lessons are there for our democratic structures and processes. One positive lesson is that voting itself was almost universally smooth and effective; we should applaud the election officials who made that happen. But, many elements of the 2024 elections are deeply challenging, from the increasingly outsized role of billionaires in the process to the onslaught of misinformation and disinformation.

Keep ReadingShow less
MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

A check mark and hands.

Photo by Allison Saeng on Unsplash. Unsplash+ License obtained by the author.

MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

Originally published by Independent Voter News.

Today, I am proud to share an exciting milestone in my journey as an advocate for democracy and electoral reform.

Keep ReadingShow less
Half-Baked Alaska

A photo of multiple checked boxes.

Getty Images / Thanakorn Lappattaranan

Half-Baked Alaska

This past year’s elections saw a number of state ballot initiatives of great national interest, which proposed the adoption of two “unusual” election systems for state and federal offices. Pairing open nonpartisan primaries with a general election using ranked choice voting, these reforms were rejected by the citizens of Colorado, Idaho, and Nevada. The citizens of Alaska, however, who were the first to adopt this dual system in 2020, narrowly confirmed their choice after an attempt to repeal it in November.

Ranked choice voting, used in Alaska’s general elections, allows voters to rank their candidate choices on their ballot and then has multiple rounds of voting until one candidate emerges with a majority of the final vote and is declared the winner. This more representative result is guaranteed because in each round the weakest candidate is dropped, and the votes of that candidate’s supporters automatically transfer to their next highest choice. Alaska thereby became the second state after Maine to use ranked choice voting for its state and federal elections, and both have had great success in their use.

Keep ReadingShow less
Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

The United States Supreme Court.

Getty Images / Rudy Sulgan

Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

Fourteen years ago, after the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the popular blanket primary system, Californians voted to replace the deeply unpopular closed primary that replaced it with a top-two system. Since then, Democratic Party insiders, Republican Party insiders, minor political parties, and many national reform and good government groups, have tried (and failed) to deep-six the system because the public overwhelmingly supports it (over 60% every year it’s polled).

Now, three minor political parties, who opposed the reform from the start and have unsuccessfully sued previously, are once again trying to overturn it. The Peace and Freedom Party, the Green Party, and the Libertarian Party have teamed up to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Their brief repeats the same argument that the courts have previously rejected—that the top-two system discriminates against parties and deprives voters of choice by not guaranteeing every party a place on the November ballot.

Keep ReadingShow less