Partisans may use pandemic to subvert election. Here's how patriots can stop them.

The strength of our nation depends not only on the health of our people and the health of our economy, but especially on the health of our democracy. Given the partisan maneuvers we saw in recent state primaries, it is prudent to be on guard against shenanigans in the upcoming presidential election. 

It is not out of the question that hyper-partisans, including the president, would try to delay the election, manipulate voting options, call its outcome into question based on specious COVID-19 arguments, or maybe just exploit a weary and vulnerable electorate.

President Donald Trump said at his April 27 COVID-19 briefing that he won’t try to delay the election, but given his record, is his word good?  Senior figures from both parties need to hold him to it to protect our democracy. Possible candidates to spearhead a “protect democracy” movement could include former Ohio Gov. John Kasich and former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, but many other former governors could rise to the patriotic occasion.

Share your coronavirus story: Contact Paste BN Opinion's hotline. We may publish your comments.

It would be a mistake to minimize the risks. Trump has threatened unilaterally “to adjourn both chambers of Congress” — a power never exercised by any president in U.S. history — and has goaded his hyper-partisans to “LIBERATE” states from their Democratic governors’ public health rules (invoking the Second Amendment, no less). Would he deploy his minions to “LIBERATE” polling places and early voting locations if it looks like the election is not going his way? Or maybe his polarizing partisans will just rattle the voting process to sow divisiveness and impugn the election’s legitimacy.

On April 23, Trump responded ominously to a reporter’s specific question about the impact of COVID-19 on the election, specifically about whether there was “a risk for legitimate elections.” The president deployed his common conspiracy trope: "I can’t tell you what’s going to happen. … lots of things are happening.  Right? … I can’t tell you what’s going to happen with the election.  I think that had we not gone through a fake Russia, Russia, Russia deal; an impeachment hoax — it was a total hoax.” 

If the president answers a question about the impact of COVID-19 on the country’s election by attacking the Russia “hoax,” that is hardly reassuring. If he thought it would help him, why wouldn’t he try to stonewall the voting process as he did the constitutional impeachment process? Respect for the Constitution and rule of law? Not likely.

Don't tolerate delay in election

Since the president’s conspiracy impulses are wholly foreseeable, we need serious public figures to lay down some markers: The presidential election takes place on the date prescribed by Congress; no effort to postpone it will be tolerated; any effort to suppress voting illegally will be condemned; and any disinformation disseminated to undermine the public’s confidence in the election will be challenged. Forging a bipartisan consensus on these principles would, in normal times, be so uncontroversial as to be trite. It is necessary today because it is foreseeable that demagogues may try to weaponize the pandemic and its destabilizing consequences.

The democracy defenders should have in mind that Trump, despite his recent claim of “total authority” to override the domestic power the Tenth Amendment accords the states, has no authority regarding the timing or conduct of the presidential election. The Constitution empowers state legislatures, and not the president, to choose the manner for appointing presidential electors (which they have all by law conferred upon the voters of their states), and grants only Congress the power to set the date (Nov. 3 this year) for choosing those electors. There is no role here for the president to interfere in this electoral process for any reason, and no partisan or pundit can be allowed to argue otherwise.

Plan for ability to vote safely

Second, advance planning is essential to ensure people can vote safely assuming fear of contagion will still be a factor in November. The federal government cannot set these standards, but a bipartisan coalition of current governors could come up with basic standards for safe and secure, physically remote voting, and call upon their legislatures to enact consensus procedures. 

If the president has any proof that voting by mail has been in the past or likely could in the future be subject to any significant fraud, he should bring it forward now. The bipartisan group should take account of any such significant risks. But if he has no proof of fraud, he should be ignored on this point.

Third, the democracy defenders must safeguard the integrity of the presidential election.  We cannot risk creating a society where a substantial segment of the public does not have confidence that the results of the election represent the will of the people.

If this president does not end up winning the election, it is predictable he will claim the outcome was stolen or rigged. Even if he wins, we all will suffer the consequences of the extreme social division he fomented. This would essentially echo the 2016 election where the Russians tried to tear us apart.  Except this time the polarizing disinformation would be of domestic origin.

Obviously, we do not usually require a movement to safeguard the public’s right to choose their next president. But these are not usual times, and now we do. The bipartisan group of former governors and other political leaders who convene to protect democracy must, simply stated, pledge their honor to speak out against any encroachment of the integrity of the November election.

Perhaps the concerns prompting the need for such active vigilance will not materialize, but when it comes to keeping the republic, better safe than sorry.

Alan Charles Raul is a founding member of Checks & Balances, a group of conservative lawyers dedicated to speaking up for the rule of law. He previously served as a presidential appointee in the Reagan and both Bush administrations.