This week, Homeland Security Secretary Kristjen Nielsen called for “verifiable and auditable” voting systems in states by the next presidential election in 2020. That’s a great plan, but upgrades cost money and it’s unclear where funding will come from.
It’s true that the U.S. election infrastructure is vulnerable to a range of attacks and that there are numerous foreign actors, including Russia, that would like to exploit those vulnerabilities. Upgrades and new equipment would give greater protection and accountability to elections. Although not a panacea, they would bolster security and add to voter confidence.
Nielsen, however, didn’t specify where the money for such upgrades would come from. Instead, she indicated that states could fund the equipment. That might be a nice answer that dodges a federal commitment but, in reality, most states don’t have the money to upgrade costly voting machines.
Nielsen’s words echo a July speech given by Vice President Mike Pence where he also called for states to upgrade voting infrastructure. Like Nielsen, though, Pence’s speech was short on funding details.
This seems to be another instance where Trump is at odds with his administration and lawmakers. Indeed, the White House seems to have blocked efforts by lawmakers to make these upgrades a reality. On Wednesday, the Secure Elections Act, introduced by Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., and supported by Democrats, was unexpectedly held up by what seems to have been a directive from the White House. The Senate Rules Committee was supposed to work on advancing that bill and bringing it to the floor in October, but instead the planned work session was canceled. White House spokeswoman Lindsay Walters said that the Trump administration would not support the legislation, adding that DHS has all the “authority it needs to assist state and local officials to improve the security of existing election infrastructure.” No specific objections to the bill were given, however.
That bill, although not yet fully worked out, would have included a provision for grants for improved cybersecurity and modernization to states and election agencies to help meet the guidelines laid out in the bill. That would have a been a good step.
Protecting elections, even if costly, must be a priority. The legitimacy of the U.S. government rests on faith in its democratic system. Failure to upgrade security or ensure that results are verifiable not only allows for potential system breaches and manipulated results, but also saps faith in, and therefore the legitimacy of, elected governments at all levels.
If the Trump administration is serious about protecting U.S. elections, it must get out the wallet for this priority. Without federal money, calls for better protections and the ability to audit results are little more than political posturing.
