The United States has a long and sordid history of voter suppression. But as we enter the final stretch of the presidential campaign, the nation faces a threat to the November election that far exceeds standard voter-suppression tactics and other partisan mischief.
For the first time in modern American history, a sitting president is openly flouting American election norms. By refusing to commit to accepting the election results; by claiming that he can lose only if the election is fraudulent; by courting foreign interference in the election; and by openly attempting to prevent millions of Americans from voting safely and securely, President Trump is undermining the central feature of American democracy: free and fair elections.
This is not a partisan issue. To acknowledge that Trump is threatening the legitimacy of the election is to observe what should be plain to all Americans. Indeed, those who have criticized such claims as hyperbolic in the past have had to recant when the president did or said something that proved the point, such as when he mused about postponing the election, which he lacks the authority to do.
Corrupting elections is not a new tactic. Indeed, it is a central tool of the autocratic playbook used across the world. Just such concerns motivated a bipartisan group of political strategists, academics, and former government officials to launch the Transition Integrity Project, a scenario-planning exercise that explored a range of potential vulnerabilities to the election and presidential transition after November 3. (I observed two of the group’s four exercises.)
The exercises demonstrated what has become abundantly clear in other realms of government and politics during the past three years: Our presidential-election process relies to a dangerous extent on norms rather than laws. We tend to think that the Supreme Court resolved the 2000 presidential contest when it was actually Al Gore’s concession that ended the impasse. Such a response is nearly impossible to imagine from the current president if the election outcome is uncertain this time around. Joe Biden is also unlikely to concede in a very close or contested election, given the pressure he would face from Democrats not to back down.
The bad news is that a candidate determined to win at all costs — particularly one who has the power of the federal government at his disposal — has a lot of options for contesting the election all the way to a victory or a constitutional crisis. And lest it seem difficult to believe, Trump has already made some of the most outlandish moves ascribed to him during the Transition Integrity Project exercises. He has openly stoked violence, disrupted the U.S. Postal Service to try to undermine absentee voting, threatened to send law enforcement to polling places (and “Democratic” cities more broadly), and explored options for simply halting absentee-ballot counting altogether. No wonder election experts are sounding alarms.
As others have argued in the Chronicle, the functioning of our democracy should be of concern to every donor trying to address systemic challenges such as climate change, racial injustice, and poor educational outcomes. Although the United States is facing an unprecedented situation this election, philanthropic organizations and individual donors have numerous options for getting involved to help avert or mitigate an electoral crisis.
Philanthropic leaders can play a particularly important role by using their civic and social capital to protect the election. For instance, they can:
- Promote poll-worker recruitment and even sign up themselves to ensure that as many polling places as possible stay open for those who want to vote in person.
- Use their communications platforms, including those of their businesses, to promote the message that every vote should be counted and that the large number of absentee ballots means we are unlikely to know the election outcome for several days and possibly even weeks.
- Ask their state and local elected officials about their plans to uphold the integrity of our democratic system if the election is contested.
- Work with religious and civic leaders in their communities to help prevent or mitigate an escalation of the violence that has wracked the nation these past weeks and that experts worry could intensify in the event of an electoral crisis.
- Ensure that their peers, colleagues, friends, and family are prepared to do all of the above.
Dozens of organizations — a contemporary “arsenal of democracy” — are working around the clock to combat threats to the election. And most still have significant funding needs.
Private foundations and other strictly nonpartisan donors can support litigation and other legal tactics. The organization Democracy Docket is engaged in more than 35 lawsuits in over 15 states to protect and expand voting rights. Both the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and Protect Democracy have filed lawsuits against the U.S. Postal Service in response to recent service changes that could harm absentee voting. Election Protection, managed by the Lawyers’ Committee, and All Voting Is Local, a program of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, are working across the country to combat voter suppression. And Pizza to the Polls is ensuring that voters who encounter long lines at their polling places are fortified with food and drink.
Donors interested in media and communications work can support and promote projects that advise the media about their election coverage. For instance, Election SOS is a nonpartisan effort “dedicated to supporting U.S. journalists in responding to critical 2020 election information needs.” It is training journalists on how to ensure their election coverage is trustworthy, including handling misinformation and disinformation, identifying attempts at voter suppression, and appropriately covering voter-safety issues related to the pandemic. The National Task Force on Election Crises, a cross-partisan commission of experts, provides neutral guidance to the media, lawmakers, and election officials about ensuring a free and fair election. Thanks to efforts like these, the media is beginning to ask important questions of itself and others about how to respond to an electoral crisis.
Donors who aren’t restricted to supporting organizations that have charity status have numerous opportunities to support crisis-related organizing and advocacy work. The Transition Integrity Project’s findings make clear that a contested election will be fought in the media and in the court of public opinion as much as it is in courts of law. One of the most important organizing efforts, Protect the Results, is building a grass-roots coalition to mobilize in the event that President Trump refuses to concede or purposefully sows discord and confusion about the outcome of the election.
A variety of donor networks are also available to those who want to give and learn alongside others, including the Democracy Funders Network, Leadership Now Project, One for Democracy, and Philanthropy for Active Civic Engagement. And donors can choose to have experts allocate their contributions where they are most needed through one of a number of pooled funds.
No matter how donors choose to get involved, upholding the integrity of the election is vital to upholding the integrity of American democracy. Our laws and institutions alone cannot save us: It is up to each of us to play our part.
