President Donald Trump firmly believes that the 2020 election was stolen. A significant number of Americans share this sentiment. As we approach another national election this fall, unanswered questions linger about the integrity of the current electoral process.
Efforts in Congress to remedy the situation have stalled. For instance, the SAVE Act, aimed at ensuring only citizens can vote, has not been passed, and it doesn’t address issues like mass mail-in voting or weaknesses in electronic systems. These components of the election process have contributed to widespread distrust among many voters, and understandably so.
One of the key issues is the misconception that the federal government should have no role in federal elections. This is simply not true.
Take what happened last April: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell convened an unexpected meeting with top banking executives. Their concern? Emerging artificial intelligence technologies that can identify and exploit vulnerabilities faster than humans can defend against them.
If those responsible for financial security felt it necessary to gather Wall Street leaders over AI-induced threats, one has to wonder about the U.S. election system. It relies on similar technologies but is arguably more susceptible to breaches.
Electronic Voting Systems
Historically, Americans have voted using paper ballots, manually counted and overseen by humans. The shift to electronic voting aimed to enhance speed and precision, but it has resulted in confusing and mistrusted tallying processes. The transparency we expect in a democratic society is lacking.
Many vendors have turned voting into a black box, using proprietary software that the public cannot scrutinize. This has led to inadequate monitoring, and skepticism regarding the results is entirely justified.
At the heart of the problem is the reliance on electronic systems for voting and counting. Major suppliers like Election Systems & Software and Dominion Voting Systems (now Liberty Vote) utilize networked equipment running proprietary software that records and tallies votes. A portion of these components is manufactured in China, which raises concerns. But even if all components were made domestically, they would still be vulnerable to remote attacks.
The underlying architecture presents issues. The software-driven processes can be accessed by malicious actors, including those hostile to the state. This vulnerability is not trivial; it represents a fundamental flaw in our democratic autonomy.
This is not merely theoretical. The People’s Liberation Army has a vast cyber force, and America’s vital infrastructure is one of its primary targets. Incidents, like the seizure of Chinese-made transformers, have exposed serious security gaps.
In 2023, Microsoft reported on a Chinese initiative called Bolt Typhoon, involving malware placed within U.S. infrastructure systems for potential sabotage. It would be naive to believe our electoral systems are immune to similar threats, especially with AI becoming increasingly weaponized.
Some might cite a recent Reuters investigation into seized Dominion machines from Puerto Rico that reportedly showed no Venezuelan coding. But that misses the bigger issue.
The crux of the matter is whether any computerized voting system can withstand the cyber capabilities of foreign intelligence agencies. The truth is, it likely cannot. Those same cyber forces that have compromised our nation’s infrastructure need not rely on specific components to access voting machines. They only need a machine connected to a network at any point, which is a condition that exists.
New Evidence
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard declassified a memo revealing that multiple countries, including China and Russia, have the ability to infiltrate U.S. election systems. Even though senior officials briefed President Trump in early 2020 about these vulnerabilities, the public remained in the dark.
Documents released later revealed that Chinese hackers accessed voter registration databases across several states. Gabbard has since initiated an inquiry into why intelligence officials may have suppressed this information.
What’s particularly concerning is that the Chinese government has invested heavily in intelligence capabilities in the U.S. Their interest in the outcomes of our elections is clear. Trump’s second term threatened their economic interests, while Biden’s administration signaled a possible relaxation of those pressures.
Let’s consider the voting numbers: Obama garnered 69 million votes in 2008, Clinton received 66 million in 2016, and Biden achieved 81 million in 2020. This surge for a Democrat not known for charisma seems suspicious, perhaps indicating more than just natural enthusiasm.
A January 2020 assessment noted that adversaries could leverage voter registration data for manipulation. It’s conceivable to think that China might be fabricating counterfeit ballots that are indistinguishable from the real ones, possibly aiding Biden’s campaign. This possibility warrants serious investigation. Why else would China hack into voter databases?
Securing Elections
Absent action from Congress, and given certain states’ reluctance to reform their voting methods, it falls upon the president to ensure secure federal elections. This authority might be legally challenged, but two executive orders could potentially address the situation.
The first would declare a state of emergency prohibiting electronic voting machines in federal contests, citing their vulnerability to cyberattacks. Although past orders recognized the threat of interference, they did so reactively.
The second order would involve transitioning to paper ballots counted by humans, with safeguards like photo IDs and verified voting lists. Mail-in ballots would be reserved for military personnel and convicted individuals. This approach would likely ensure the most transparent electoral process in history.
Ideally, states should manage this new system, but political divides may obstruct that. An alternative might involve the federal government overseeing elections directly through a national guard force.
Critics might argue that Congress holds the authority to regulate election procedures. However, when states falter in upholding basic electoral rights, the federal government has a responsibility to step in.
The core infrastructure, including election systems, falls under the purview of the Department of Homeland Security. Yet, these agencies currently lack the resources to fend off such potent cyber threats. In short, cybersecurity against nations like China is far beyond the capability of state governments acting alone.
If federal agencies possess intelligence regarding a cyberattack targeting electronic voting systems but lack the means to thwart it, will they merely allow it to happen?
A sensible approach would be to explore voting methods that are less vulnerable to cyberattacks. This is precisely why urgent executive action is so critical.
The Challenge Ahead
As Gabbard’s declassification confirms, China has indeed accessed crucial voter registration data. Elections conducted on systems connected to networks that hostile nations can compromise can never achieve the legitimacy Americans deserve.
Purely relying on paper ballots counted by hand may seem controversial, yet it is arguably the only way to guarantee fair elections for the populace.
