Hallmarks of a functioning democracy include free and fair elections and peaceful transfer of power.
Even while discounting the Electoral College system that enables a candidate receiving fewer votes than an opponent to become president — as happened in two of the last five elections — American elections have a checkered history.
Early in US history, only white male property owners were entitled to vote. In the beginning of the 19th century, state legislatures began to eliminate the property restriction. And whaddaya know — 144 years after the Declaration of Independence, the 19th amendment to the Constitution finally granted women the right to vote.
During Reconstruction after the Civil War, the 15th amendment “ensured that people could not be denied because of race.” However, the South used poll taxes, literacy tests, and, well into the 20th century, imposed numerous barriers to prevent voting by African Americans. That’s what the late John Lewis’s legacy is about, the right of African Americans to vote.
What would have been entirely unpredictable, a white Southern Democrat, Lyndon Johnson, muscled through the Voting Rights Act of 1965, at long last guaranteeing African Americans the right to vote.
However checkered the history of presidential elections, once a victor was determined, the case was closed — the vanquished conceded, and urged the country to move forward. After the Kennedy-Nixon race of 1960, Nixon conceded, urging acceptance of the results, even though there were alleged problems, particularly in Cook County and Chicago.
Similarly, during the Bush-Gore race in 2000, with “hanging chads,” confusing ballots in which voters “voted for Buchannan” when they thought they were voting for Gore, and the Supreme Court decision awarding victory to Bush, Gore conceded and urged the nation to support the president.
But this is 2020, with a president who has violated numerous accepted norms, if not the law, and demurs when asked what happens if he loses in November.
Trump tipped his hand early on when, even winning the Electoral College, hence the election, he vehemently cried “fraud,” disputing the count that awarded Hillary Clinton some three million more votes than he received. He cites “fraud” even when he wins. Should he lose, the prospects of him graciously conceding are slim and none. He’s already screaming that the Democrats are attempting to steal the election, and is casting doubt on the results even before the first ballot is cast.
History tells us that when the country is in a bad mood, presidents are in trouble. In 1980, between stagflation and Iran holding American hostages, the country was in a bad mood. Whether Carter was at fault or not, he was seen as presiding over failure, and was soundly whipped.
In 1992, a mild recession was enough to enable a previously unknown governor from Arkansas to defeat George H.W. Bush who was earlier believed to be unbeatable.
In 2020, with COVID-19, a depressed economy, and continued racial strife, the country is in a bad mood. Trump and his supporters assert that he has handled COVID-19 “brilliantly.” Many think not. What matter is that, whether at fault or not, Trump is presiding over failure far worse than any real or alleged failures of Jimmy Carter or H.W. Bush. Not surprisingly, Trump is in trouble.
But poll numbers, however currently accurate, are not predictions. What matters in elections are three things: who is allowed to vote, who actually votes, and whose votes are counted.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 contained a provision whereby states with a history of suppressing Black voting had to submit proposed voting changes to the US Dept. of Justice for approval. In 2013 the Roberts-led US Supreme Court determined that this provision was “no longer necessary,” thus gutting the heart of the 1965 Act. Immediately following this decision many states imposed various means to suppress votes, such as strict ID requirements. These ID requirements generally don’t consider student IDs as valid, and discriminate against elderly people who don’t already have valid IDs.
The stated intention of these restrictions is to “prevent fraud.” The notion that large numbers of voters would risk incarceration to cast an illegal extra vote is absurd. There is absolutely no evidence that this has occurred. The obvious real intent is to suppress the Democratic vote, bringing us to the next factor, who actually votes.
Time-tested methods to limit who actually votes are easily accomplished by various means such as limiting the numbers of polling places, causing long lines in inclement weather. Put those polling places where there is no public transportation. Purge voters from the rolls if they have not voted in recent elections, forcing them to re-register. Limit early voting to inconvenient hours. Close the doors early. During recent elections, these tactics have been concentrated on areas where African-American and Democratic votes would be expected to dominate.
If voters overcome barriers designed to stop or discourage them, and manage to actually vote, there remains the requirement that their votes are counted. Because of COVID-19, there is increased interest in absentee voting — either by mail or placement in drop-off boxes. Under the assumption that a heavy turnout favors Democrats—as Trump publicly admitted — Trump is earnestly attempting to squelch absentee voting, citing that it is “ripe for fraud.” There is absolutely no evidence for this. Some states have been successfully using vote-by-mail for some time.
The most blatant attempt to prevent vote by mail is to curb the capacity of the US Postal Service. Trump has appointed as Postmaster General a large donor, Mr. Louis DeJoy. He promptly sacked or transferred 23 executives and imposed measures that have slowed service. The Postal Service has lost employees via COVID-19. Nevertheless, DeJoy has cut overtime for workers, even as there is increased reliance on mail service during the pandemic, and will be even greater demand with increased vote-by-mail.
Will these votes be counted?
Trump declares vote-by-mail as “fraudulent,” even as he is sabotaging the very government agency that handles the mail — and that he ostensibly is in charge of.
— John Waelti of Monroe, a retired professor of economics, can be reached at jjwaelti1@tds.net. His column appears Saturdays in the Monroe Times.
