"Braver Angels" Clip Their Wings

Their new bipartisan report, "Trustworthy Elections," features good proposals but fails to address much of what drives the lack of confidence in elections. A good start, but an "I" for Incomplete.

Braver Angels is arguably the most successful, if not most important organization in American today dedicated to bridging partisan divides and promoting civil political discourse. I’m a member and supporter and have participated in some of their activities.

Regional and national organizations are doing yeoman’s work, including the Convergence Center for Policy Resolution, an organization I helped start, and the Stubblefield Institute for Civil Political Communication at Shepherd University in the West Virginia panhandle that I now co-chair. But Braver Angels is a unique national grassroots organization that mobilizes millions of Americans to improve civil discourse in remarkable ways.

I am particularly impressed with their work on three fronts. First, teaching people with polar opposite politics how to engage in dialogue. I remember being paired up for a series of Zoom calls with a retired teacher from the Midwest, a Democrat. We discovered that we had more in common and agreed more than not, agreed to disagree on a few things, and got along famously. I enjoyed learning about his experiences, and he seemed fascinated with some of my past policy and political work.

Second, Braver Angels has beenworking on a bipartisan a template to improve political debates. Political debates, the type you see on television, are hit and miss, depending on the moderators’ and the format. Since and including 2012, when CNN’s Candy Crowley inappropriately and erroneously intervened in a presidential debate between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama - tipping the scales in favor of the latter - moderator quality has been hit and miss. Mostly the latter. The Commission on Presidential Debates beclowned itself with its schedule and antics during the 2016 presidential debates.

Third, Braver Angels unveiled its “Trustworthy Elections” report on Sunday night, resulting from bipartisan deliberations between a few experts and its “grassroots” members. I take their work seriously, given their “bottoms up” nature. That reminds me of the late William F. Buckley’s admonition that he trusted the first 2,000 names in the Manhattan phone directory over the faculty of Harvard College. I might pick another phone directory (Oklahoma City or Peoria would be good), but point made. They tap into the views and concerns of average patriotic citizens, many of them poll watchers and election volunteers concerned with eroding confidence in election procedures and outcomes. I share that concern. In a recent Washington Post poll, more than a third of Americans don’t believe Joe Biden’s 2020 election was legitimate.

Some polling, especially by Rasmussen and TIPP, suggests confidence in specific upcoming and recent elections could be better.

Confidence in our elections and their outcome are the bedrock of our democratic republic. Without that, confidence in our elected officials’ integrity and actions become suspect, undermining the rule of law, even trust in our basic institutions.

The question is, how do we fix what’s broken?

Democrats have a solution, encapsulated in the “For the People Act,” which was their top priority in the last Congress (2021-22). It shreds the constitutional provision that local and state governments have primacy over election methods and administration, outlaws voter ID, and many more provisions that open the door to massive fraud. It is the single biggest “threat to democracy” I’ve ever seen out of Congress, and elect a Democratic trifecta (control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency), and it will become law. It is designed to eradicate any opposition and move to a one-party state - just like the old Soviet Union or Communist China today.

Think I’m being extreme? Read the bill and imagine it in practice. Fortunately, it would likely be declared unconstitutional unless and until Democrats pack the Supreme Court with new members. Whichever comes first.

Republicans have their solution, too, encapsulated in the “American Confidence in Elections Act.” First, it recognized state and local supremacy, but suggests a “model law” that should be followed. It’s not perfect, but is a very good and detailed bill. Some of their top provisions:

• Only US citizens should be allowed to vote in any election. Period. Proof of citizenship to register, including by mail, is allowed. It further penalizes states and localities that permit non-citizens to vote with a 30 percent cut in aid from the “Help America Vote Act.” (I’d go further. Much further)

• Protects the ability to require the presentation of photo ID at polling places and absentee balloting (such as requiring driver’s license, Social Security, or state identification numbers on absentee mail ballot requests to match against official records), especially for first-time voters.

• It prohibits private funding of election administration (“Zuckbucks”).

• “Prohibits mailing ballots except upon a voter’s request, establishes a signature verification process, requires signatures to be dated, and requires all mail ballots except military/overseas ballots be received by the close of polls.” (Emphasis added)

• It would eliminate the current limit on a political party’s ability to provide “coordinated” expenditures to candidates, enhancing the role of political parties in elections transparently.

• It addresses cybersecurity concerns.

The “Honest Elections Report,” led by experts is another outstanding report that details, many of them reflected in the aforementioned legislation. There is much more, and some provisions make me nervous, especially making it easier for “independent expenditure” campaigns to hide major financial supporters in the name of “free speech.” I would add a provision that establishes “watermarked” ballot papers to ensure they cannot be duplicated to prevent fraud. I would also replace “signature verification” on mail ballots - a subjective process - with another method.

I also don’t see a reasonable limit or period for “early voting” (two weeks seems good, but Virginia’s 45-day period is absurd and burdens local governments). But it’s a good model law.

Mail voting should be discouraged, given the potential for lost or damaged ballots, questons of signature verification, voters omissions, and fraud. Mail voting complicates everything. The more people touch your ballot, the more likely it is to be mishandled and uncounted.

In-person voting, early or otherwise, should be encouraged. Most every federal commission, including the 2005 Carter-Baker Commission, noted that mail ballots are the least reliable and secure means to vote and are prone to errors and fraud. Even European countries don’t allow or strictly limit absentee or mail voting, even early voting.

There’s a public benefit to ensuring people vote on the same day, or close to it, to benefit from full access to information that sometimes arrives late in a competitive campaign season - like debates. Or laptops. Or phony “all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation” disinformation campaigns. You get the point.

Braver Angels includes some of the same recommendations in their report, but fell short in several areas, and wandered off into post election “peaceful transfer of power” stuff that reflect continued hysteria over J6. It failed to recommend that all ballots should be received by the close of polling on election day. It failed to address concerns over mail voting. It failed to address the need for reasonable limits on early voting. It didn’t address the need for measures to curb mail fraud and ballot trafficking or harvesting. It did not address the scourge of non-citizen voting in jurisdictions like New York.

Most importantly, it failed to mention the biggest source for irregular voting and fraud: poorly maintained voter rolls or files.

The 1993 National Voter Registration Act, or “Motor Voter” law, requires regular maintenance to ensure accuracy. Many states aren’t complying and have been sued, successfully, for their failure to do so. States should be required to report regularly and be subject to audits as a qualification to receive any federal assistance for election administration. In addition, voting should not be allowed, certainly not counting, with the full presence of poll watchers and election officials representing both major parties and any independent candidates or other parties.

I’ve heard too many stories of GOP election officials or watchers, especially in Philadelphia, being kicked out of polling places on election day while Democratic officials start their shenanigans. By the time judges get around to ordering the officials and poll watchers back in, the damage is done. Several years ago, the New York Post featured an op-ed by a Democratic consultant who explained the type of shenanigans he and others sometimes use on mail-in ballots. They matter in close elections.

There’s a reason why many recent voter fraud prosecutions happen with Philadelphia Democrats. And they’re just the ones who’ve been caught.

It’s a good start, and perhaps we’ll learn more why Bravers Angels’ participants in the process, all of whom deserve thanks and praise, didn’t go further, as The Confidence in American Elections Act did, or the Honest Elections Report. I think “gerrymandering” and “peaceful transfer of power” concerns are fine but largely unrelated to election integrity. The protection and encouragement of polling workers and volunteers is valuable, and increasing resources, including more polling places to make in-person voting easier and faster, is welcome. I’m okay with making election day a national holiday (many unions arrange for their members to get the day off to work the polls), so long as it replaces an existing federal holiday.

If it were up to me, I’d make April 15th election day - the same day your taxes are due. Or change the April 15th deadline for taxes to election day. Or maybe Independence Day. The easiest thing to do is move Veterans Day to Election Day, reminding us of those in uniform who sacrificed to protect our rights and privileges as Americans as we vote.

Protecting and enhancing our overseas military and diplomatic personnel’s participation ability is also very important.

The report is based on three principles:

“Voting should be easy. Cheating should be hard.”

“Every citizen should have an equal say in who will govern them; this is done through free and fair elections.”

“The American government will fail if candidates refuse to accept any outcome other than victory.”

The key to making the third one work is not repeating the scandalous and corrupt behavior of some states such as Pennsylvania where unelected officials and courts unilaterally changed election laws in 2020, or the kind of incompetence we saw in Arizona’s Maricopa County. It starts with clean and up-to-date voting rolls, transparent elections along every step of the process, discouraging mail balloting, and ensuring all ballots arrive by the close of polls.

Good start, Braver Angels, but your project gets an “I” for incomplete.