Congressional Democrats this week moved to focus heightened concern about election preparedness on four of the biggest battlegrounds: Texas, Florida, Georgia and Wisconsin.
The majority of a special House committee, created this spring to oversee the government's response to the coronavirus pandemic, issued a report Wednesday focusing their apprehension on the limits of mail-in voting, poll worker shortages and safety of polling places in those states — with a combined 93 electoral votes central to the campaign strategies of both President Trump and Joe Biden.
The report by the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis, which no Republicans signed, urged the states to spend quickly and generously to fix the problems — something they are unlikely to be able to do without a cash infusion from Congress itself, which looks less likely every day.
The GOP-run Senate, Trump administration and Democratic House have been deadlocked for two months on the size and scope of another coronavirus economic recovery package, meaning the $3.6 billion in election aid the states have been seeking (or, more likely, a small fraction if it) is not close to being delivered in time to smooth the logistics of an election that is just 54 days away and will turn on the record use of voting by mail.
"The states face the risk of serious problems in the general election," the report said. "In some of these states, these risks are exacerbated by state policies restricting mail-in voting and early voting."
Last month, the panel sent letters to chief election administrators in the four states requesting information about their general election plans.
"With just two months left before the general election, states cannot simply defer to local election officials to address these problems. Instead, states should move swiftly and proactively to implement CDC recommendations and ensure a free, fair, and safe election," the subcommittee wrote, referring to a report issued in June by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
All four face significant shortages in poll workers, and officials have not done enough to boost recruitment, the panel found. Georgia has said it needs 20,000 people to staff precincts Nov. 3 but the state has only filled a quarter of these positions so far.
Georgia officials also decided not to send all 7 million voters an absentee ballot application, like they did for the primary. This change could lead to confusion and potential disenfranchisement, the panel concluded.
Since Florida's March presidential contest and August primaries, state officials have not done enough to address long wait times or poll worker shortages, the report found. The state also lacks a sufficient early voting period.
Texas is one of just six states, and the only one that's competitive in the presidential race, that has not relaxed its restrictive excuse rules for absentee voting in response to the risks of voting in person posed by Covid-19. Half of the state's 254 county election officials also indicated concerns about not having enough people to work the polls.
Long lines and polling location closures in Wisconsin's April primary raised concerns for how the state will conduct its elections this fall. To help with staffing shortages, state officials have requested 1,100 National Guard members to be deployed as poll workers. But the subcommittee warned this could lead to voter intimidation, "especially given the history of law enforcement suppressing the votes of people of color."
During a hearing Wednesday where the report was released, panel Chairman Jim Clyburn of South Carolina, a senior member of the House leadership and one of Biden's most influential backers, urged passage of additional funding to assist state elections and the Postal Service. (Grants totalling $400 million have almost all been spent since Congress delivered that money in March.)
Conducting a "free, fair and safe election in these circumstances is a challenge, but let there be no doubt if we all do our part America is up to the challenge," Clyburn said.
He also lambasted the president for resisting the additional money on the grounds it would allow for more voting by mail, which he asserted without evidence will create so much fraud that the November results can't be trusted — the first ever such denigration of democracy's basic function by an American president
"The evidence shows Americans are more likely to get struck by lightning than to conduct voter fraud by mail," Clyburn said.
Not so, responded Steve Scalise, the GOP whip and one of Trump's most important allies at the Capitol. "We don't want a recipe for disaster where we literally would be counting ballots weeks and weeks later," he said.
A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.