When Democratic Values Are Used to Defeat Democracy
In watching video replays of the mayhem January 6 at the Capitol, it is easy to overlook the motivation of many (not the militia members) who were there. “Stop the Steal” resonated because it was a call to rescue the nation from a fraudulent election . Therein lay its power. Also, its great danger.
The good news is that democracy is valued. Free and fair elections are valued. Those who would undermine elections and weaken democracy are forced to conceal their wolfish intent under the woolen skin of a sheep. The blatant attempt to steal masqueraded as a fight against fraud, tapping into long cherished beliefs about democracy, freedom, independence and self-government.
The bad news is how easily those values can be harnessed by leaders intent on destroying those very values.
People in the streets fighting to overturn a fraudulent election is a common story.
Bolivia in October of 2019. Early counting showed the incumbent president ahead, but without enough votes to avoid a runoff election. There was a break of 20 hours in the reporting of votes. When the counting resumed the president had just enough votes to win. People hit the streets.
Belarus in August of 2020. The unpopular president, dubbed “the last dictator in Europe”, was declared winner of the election with 80 percent of the vote. Hundreds of thousands took to the streets to protest the fraud.
Myanmar this February. A military coup negated the previous election, deposed the president, and took over the government. People called a general strike and took to the streets.
The emotional words of protesters in DC, Bolivia, Belarus and Myanmar are interchangeable.
“I will protect our country’s democracy with my life.” “People refuse to have this president. He is illegitimate.” “I’m here, because my vote got stolen.” “There is no option that’s off the table for the sake of freedom.”
Imagine what would have happened if the actual intended steal here had succeeded and the electoral college votes had been thrown out. People in cities and small towns across the country would have taken to the streets in numbers that would have dwarfed the numbers at the Capitol.
Usually, elections are stolen by incumbents who also control the election process. They make sure that the count turns out the way it is supposed to. Trump tried, but he didn’t control the process. When he demanded the Georgia Secretary of State to find the votes he needed to win, the Secretary of State refused.
Blocked in his attempt at real fraud, Trump, supported by a majority of Republican members of Congress, created the illusion of fraud which had the same effect of summoning people to the street. Trump had carefully groomed his followers to believe. He repeatedly said there would be fraud. He could only lose if there was fraud. He predicted that he would be ahead on election night, and by the next morning enough votes would have been found to make him lose.
So, when it happened as they were told it would happen, they were primed. They believed. They headed to the Capitol.
The story doesn’t begin or end with January 6. There are always those who would subvert democracy, who are not willing to accept the results of a free election. Charging fraud has been the commonly chosen means of attacking the legitimacy of elections and democracy itself.
Elections are the foundation of democracy. When voting is easy and convenient more people vote. When more people vote and participate in their own governing, democracy is more vigorous, more robust, and more representative of the will of all the people.
For some years now, however, Republican leaders have believed they have less chance of winning when more people vote. As far back as 1980, Paul Weyrich, one of the fathers of the modern conservative movement was very clear about not wanting a large turnout in elections. In a speech to a religious right gathering in Dallas, he said, “I don’t want everybody to vote … our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.” In rare moments of candor, Republican elected officials have agreed with the sentiment.
Republicans have acted on their belief by changing the rules in states where they have had power to make voting more difficult. Fraud, that familiar word, is their public justification. If there is fraud, they argue, results do not reflect the will of the people. The playbook is consistent. The democratic value of a fair and accurate election is used to justify weakening democracy.
Taking advantage of the increasing perception of fraud that they themselves have created, Republicans in states across the country are accelerating their efforts to restrict voting. The proposals introduced so far this year create more bureaucratic hoops for voters to jump through, impose stricter voter ID requirements, slash voter registration opportunities, enable more aggressive voter roll purges, limit mail voting access, reduce the number of days voting is allowed, and limit absentee voting. In short, they make it more difficult to vote.
Not surprisingly, the three states in which the most bills have been filed by Republicans are Arizona, Pennsylvania and Georgia, states that were the mostly hotly contested in 2020, where the vote was close, and where a small change in turnout could flip who wins.
In Wisconsin, former Republican Governor Scott Walker recently called for signature verification on ballots, limiting absentee voting to people in nursing homes and the military, limiting everyone else to same day, one day voting, and using only paper ballots.
The proposals have little connection to making elections more accurate or the counting more transparent. They will, however, make voting more difficult. Fewer people will vote.
How to respond?
First, celebrate the commitment to democratic values people have shown and their commitment to free, fair and transparent elections. Latch on to the willingness to fight to defend democracy. Refuse to cede the anti-fraud issue to the Republicans. Where there is actual fraud, join in finding a way to stamp it out.
Second, fight every effort to make voting more difficult – not by attacking the Republican sponsors, but by stirring up their voters who will have to deal with the increased inconveniences. Let those legislators face a backlash from their own voters who like the convenience of extended days and mail-in ballots. Who want to vote, but for whom voting in person on a particular day is difficult or impossible.
Third, don’t just oppose. Think of ways, both real and cosmetic, to make the process more transparent and accurate in ways that engender confidence, while making the act of voting itself simple and accessible. Put whatever extra work is required on the agencies that run elections and give them the resources to do the job.
In summary: connect with the energy and emotion in people of all kinds, in all places, that supports, defends and is willing to fight for democracy. Make voting easy. Make the election process accurate and transparent. Increase confidence in the results. Be proactive. Be positive. At every opportunity, affirm a commitment to a more robust democracy.
Douglas Kane is the author of "Our Politics: Reflections on Political Life" published in 2019 by Southern Illinois University Press
[subscribe2]