Trump Shouldn't Take Election Advice From a Russian Dictator
While mail-in voting provides obvious logistical challenges, every serious analysis of mail-in voting results has found it to be secure.
After providing his red carpet welcome to Vladimir Putin in Alaska last month to discuss ending the Ukraine war, President Donald Trump oddly and approvingly quoted the Russian leader's advice for the United States. The American Nobel Peace Prize-seeker didn't seem too concerned about the fairness of any potential deal to carve up Ukraine at Russia's behest.
But Trump was fixated on the supposed lack of fairness of U.S. elections, even though he won two of them (and claims to have won three). In an interview with Fox News, Trump echoed Putin's words: "He said: 'Your election was rigged because you have mail-in voting…It's impossible to have mail-in voting and have honest elections.'" Trump also repeated Putin's bizarre claim that the United States is the only nation that uses a mail-in process.
Given that Russia stepped up its Ukraine attacks shortly after Trump boarded Air Force One, he might have realized that Putin might not be an honest broker—let alone a font of electoral wisdom. Simple research shows 34 countries or territories have some mail-in voting and—in an amazing coincidence—that list largely mirrors those countries that are freest, wealthiest and most democratic.
Even the U.S. State Department questions the Russian leader's commitment to democracy: "Putin's pre-determined victory was no surprise—although the 87% of the vote that he supposedly won is farcical," even in the context of intimidation and repression. He's been president or prime minister since 2000.
Not that the Constitution seems to matter much to our administration as it stations federal troops in U.S. cities, but Trump's plan to outlaw mail-in voting by executive fiat is in flagrant violation of the founding document. As legal scholar Rick Hasen told PBS, "An executive order is an order to the executive branch as to how to carry out the laws. It's not a royal edict."
Article I, Section 4 explains, "The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof." That section allows Congress—not the president—to alter federal-election rules, but it's solely for congressional elections and, to quote UCLA's Hasen again, is allowed in the context of, say, enforcing "the 15th Amendment to bar race discrimination in voting."
Trump also has vowed to implement a Voter ID system, as he scribbled on Truth Social: "Voter I.D. Must Be Part of Every Single Vote. NO EXCEPTIONS! I Will Be Doing An Executive Order To That End!!!" Again, Trump really can't implement this edict without congressional approval, but the whole voter-ID idea is a canard—albeit one that conservatives champion as if it's a groundbreaking endeavor.
Here are a few more facts that Trump-channeling-Putin would never share with you. While mail-in voting provides obvious logistical challenges, every serious analysis of mail-in voting results has found it to be secure. "Despite this dramatic increase in mail voting over time, fraud rates remain infinitesimally small," according to the Brennan Center, with fraud rates of around 0.00001% of votes cast.
Even conservative groups that push the voter-fraud narrative can only manage to put together a list of anecdotal evidence. Well, sure voter fraud does happen. I grew up in Philadelphia in the 1970s, where it was an art form. That was well before widespread mail-in balloting. But the whole mail-in-voting-equals-fraud nonsense gained legs in 2020 when Trump was trying to steal an election he lost. He disreputably convinced his followers that every election MAGA loses is fraudulent, thus leading to much election distrust today.
I was furious when Gov. Gavin Newsom, as part of his COVID-19 executive-order excesses, unilaterally imposed a vote-by-mail system. Not that there's anything wrong with the resulting system. I like the ability to review California's initiative-filled ballots at the kitchen table and cast my vote that way. But the Legislature fixed his overreach by passing mail-in voting in the proper manner.
California's vote-counting is notorious for taking weeks to get results, but that's a function of screwy deadlines rather than the mail-in balloting itself. If you hear anyone claim that mail-in voting is the reason for the California Republican Party's continuing woes, you can assume that person is delusional.
Furthermore, virtually no one commits voter fraud by showing up at a polling station and claiming to be someone else. Voter ID laws have done little to combat fraud, although I support them (provided they accommodate those without driver's licenses) to bolster confidence in the system. Some California Republicans are pushing an initiative to require it, which is fine—but it's basically about political posturing rather than election reform.
You're obviously free to vote for MAGA candidates who cynically use the election-integrity argument, just as you're free to vote for presidents who take Putin's election advice. Just don't go thinking that doing so by mail or without an ID makes any difference in the final count.
This column was first published in The Orange County Register.
