Unfortunately, there has been a resurgence of political violence in recent years. The attack on former President Donald Trump was only the most recent and spectacular such incident. Previously, there was the attack on the husband of the Speaker of the House of Representatives with a hammer, “swatting” attacks on members of Congress and others, and the actions of the rioters on January 6, 2021, in the Capitol.
It’s important to recognize that this kind of violence doesn’t just happen. It’s part of a larger process in which overheated and unnecessary political rhetoric can sometimes turn into real actions. One of the contributing factors is the recent increased efforts to undermine the secret ballot in American elections. Efforts to undermine ballot secrecy in several states should serve as a wake-up call to the larger threat we face – and move us to action.
Anonymity in the voting booth has long been taken for granted, but it is a cornerstone of our electoral system. The secret ballot was introduced in the 19th century to counter the widespread practice of vote buying. It proved remarkably effective, giving voters the freedom to vote according to their conscience rather than toeing the party line.
Several developments are now threatening that dynamic. Efforts – often well-intentioned – to create greater transparency in elections have ultimately resulted in it becoming easier for the public to find out who a particular voter voted for, even when that information is supposedly secret. Some criminals have abused that information to oust officials, or do worse.
In Texas, a right-wing website appears to have managed to track the Republican Party chairman’s voting behavior in the primary elections and use that information to pressure him to resign. In Oklahoma, the state legislature has introduced a bill that would upload all information on voters’ ballots to a publicly searchable online database. And in Arizona, a proposal would publish voters’ names, addresses, birth dates and other personal information online.
The rationale for these proposals lies in the widespread belief that mass voter fraud influences election results. In many jurisdictions, there is little or no evidence that this is the case, and court cases and audits in several states have repeatedly confirmed that most election results are consistent with unofficial results.
Fortunately, the problem of actual voter fraud is relatively small, affecting no more than a tiny fraction of the total vote in any election. Whenever potential voter fraud occurs, it must be investigated, evaluated, adjudicated, and prosecuted if evidence points to fraud. When I served as Alabama’s 53rd Secretary of State from 2015 to 2023, there were more than 1,800 reports of voter or election fraud, resulting in eight convictions during that eight-year period. That was the highest number of any state in the Union during that time.
But as the idea that elections are “rigged” has taken hold, numerous states have introduced new transparency measures. These include provisions in Texas, Oklahoma and Colorado that make more information about voters’ ballots available to the public, which would theoretically allow for greater oversight throughout the vote-counting process.
But the actual results were disturbing. People – like the former Republican chairman in Texas – had to quit their jobs. In Colorado, an election official wanted to test how easy it would be to find out her own voting preference. According to Votebeat, this took less than 20 minutes.
At a time when our politics are as deeply divided and polarized as they are now, this is a dangerous path to take. It’s reasonable for voters, especially those in a position of public trust, to worry about potential consequences if they’re caught casting the “wrong” vote. And unlike national politicians with security guards, many state and local officials have few options to protect themselves from potential threats.
After the recent surge in political violence the country has experienced, this is likely to have a broader and potentially even more chilling effect as people fear their ballots will be discovered. This could take us back to the old days when many people made their voting decisions based on fear and intimidation rather than voting according to their conscience. This would be less vote buying and more voter threatening, which is equally destructive.
Transparency and oversight are understandable expectations, but they should be pursued sensibly and with consideration of potential trade-offs. At the state level, any new measures to publicly release election information should be accompanied by strong safeguards to ensure that information cannot be traced back to an individual’s name and personal information. In cases where there are small voting districts with a small total number of voters, officials should take steps to protect voters by “pooling” information to maintain anonymity.
Some states already do this. In North Carolina, for example, officials introduce statistical “noise,” where an entire precinct votes a certain way so that the public cannot determine who voted for whom. This noise obviously has no impact on the final count, but it serves as a smokescreen to protect people’s privacy. These provisions should be implemented in all states to protect voters.
And we’ve seen authorities respond quickly to potential threats. In Texas, the attorney general and others called a special hearing after it became clear that ballot secrecy had been violated. Ultimately, they issued a legal opinion challenging the conduct in question and reminding authorities that “personally identifiable information on ballots must be redacted.” This level of decisive action will be essential as threats continue to evolve in the future.
The kind of violence we have seen in the country recently is thankfully still very rare. But as elected officials, politicians and ordinary citizens, we should make it our priority to ensure that we do everything in our power to contain and resist it.
If we want to live in the overheated political environment we currently find ourselves in, we should at least make sure that we do everything in our power to prevent rhetoric from turning into violence.
John H. Merrill is a former Secretary of State of Alabama and advisor to the Project “Secure Elections”.
We welcome your opinion in a letter to the editor. Read the guidelines and Send your letter hereIf you have any problems with the form, you can send it by email to the following address: [email protected]
