There are processes in place to assure Americans about election integrity
Election security, voter intimidation and post-election unrest are among the concerns swirling around the outcome of #Election2020.
The 2020 election was already set to be a contentious event — happening amid a global pandemic and months of social unrest. President Donald Trump has also generated distrust by repeatedly questioning the legitimacy of mail-in ballots.
Photo via Pixabay
Though the FBI found no evidence of fraud schemes with mail-in ballots this year, investigators did uncover Russian and Iranian disinformation campaigns intended to influence U.S. voters. Election Day fears have now shifted to the possibility of voter intimidation at the polls on Nov. 3.
Connecticut has taken steps to strengthen the state’s cyber defense systems ensuring election integrity amid reports of foreign interference, WFSB reported. Secretary of the State Denise Merrill said Connecticut has multiple checks and balances in place to stop voter fraud.
Merrill also warned against voter intimidation at the polls, saying it is illegal and violators will be prosecuted. New Haven, Stamford and Fairfield police say they are prepared to address voter intimidation.
Similar preparations are happening nationwide, according to NPR. Military officials don't anticipate violence at the polls, but they do say unrest could occur after the election, regardless of who wins. If violence erupts and local police need help, governors can activate National Guard units, just as Minnesota did during protests following the death of George Floyd.
Hartford Courant political reporter Daniela Altimari says this election is unique, but the notion of politics being a battle is not.
“Its a double edged sword because you want to inform people and convey the importance, but you don’t want to add to the political polarization.”
One important message Altimari directed convey to voters is that “Your everyday life is so much more affected by what is going on at the state level,” she said. “It’s hard to convince people of the importance of local elections when you have such an attention-demanding figure running for election.”
What if the election is contested?
The Constitution says that the President's term ends at noon on January 20, according to UConn Associate Political Science Professor Ronald Schurin. He added that it is “hard to see how [the election] would not be completed by the inauguration.”
Also stated in the Constitution is voters don’t actually elect the presidents, they elect the electors who are supposed to cast electoral votes accordingly. This process is what we know as the electoral college.
“The states could technically choose electors through state legislature without violating the constitution,” said Schurin. “It would, however, violate our democratic norms and in highly unprobable.”
A more probable scenario, if the validity of the election is in question, is letting the decision fall to the Supreme Court, explained UConn Law and Public Policy Professor Douglas M. Spencer in an earlier Crash Course newsletter.
“The only good news, from my perspective, is that there actually is a plan in place,” Spencer said. “There's no situation in which there's a vacuum of power and we don't know who is leading us.”
Political tensions amplified by social media
UConn Assistant Journalism Prof. Amanda Crawford says social media platforms may play a bigger role in influencing political tensions than we realize.
“So many of us are in our own echo-chambers — we only get information from people we agree with politically,” Crawford said.
Polarization is happening throughout the country in general, but Crawford said the phenomenon is even more amplified on social media platforms. Political scientists are researching how our social media accelerates hyper-partisanship, reported the Wall Street Journal.
“The algorithms of social media platforms can track and tailor the content you interact with,” said Crawford. “This algorithm is good in some ways, but when it comes to politics, it could limit the information you see and reinforce this divide.”
Crawford says Americans put a lot of faith into our media delivering us the news we need to make decisions we need in our democracy, rather the stories that get high engagement.
The CEOs of major social media companies are currently discussing their role in influencing public discourse with Senate Commerce Committee. Social media companies, which face no liability for communication on their networks, are defending protections in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.