Below is updated message guidance on the Presidential Advisory Committee on Election Integrity which was created by executive order by President Trump on May 11, 2017 and first met in Washington on July 19. Previous messaging guidance can be found here.
On Tuesday September 12, members of the Pence-Kobach commission will meet at St. Anselm College in Manchester, NH. Since their last meeting, all 50 states received an updated data request letter from vice chair Kobach attempted to address the faults in his first sweeping request. Democrats on the commission have heard nothing from leadership since the last meeting.
Goals
- Lead with values (freedom, democracy, equality, trust, and responsibility) and pro-voter solutions to improve elections and illustrate how those efforts encourage voter participation (modernize voter registration, early voting, etc.). Lift up recent voting rights wins in the states and in the courts.
- Discredit and undermine the commission by highlighting its lack of transparency, overreach into state and local authority, mishandling of voters’ private information, lack of bipartisanship, and failure to address the real solutions to secure our elections and restore trust in our democracy.
o Highlight Kobach’s record of deceit, secretiveness, and attempts to complicate the voting process. He is against voters freely participating in our democracy. Raise suspicions of other commission members like J. Christian Adams, Ken Blackwell, and Hans Von Spakovsky.
Messaging Pointers
Refrain from calling this the voter fraud commission or so-called “election integrity” commission. This, feeds the opposition’s narrative and puts us on the defensive. Call this body the “sham commission,” a term frequently adopted in media coverage.
Be accurate when characterizing the pushback to Kobach’s data request. Now that Kobach sent an updated data request to Secretaries of State, more have responded to his letter. Brennan Center maintains the most up to date list of state election leaders’ responses. We do not want to feed the “fake news” narrative by being imprecise.
Avoid acronyms and jargon.
Lead with shared values language that emphasizes the collective nature of democracy and the threat this commission represents to Americans’ freedom to vote.
When applicable, point to specific state and local election officials in your area as the best-qualified to address the voting needs of your community. Many of these people are questioning the commission’s request on the basis of data security concerns, cost, federal overreach, and a lack of trust in the commission's leaders.
Key Talking Points
Lead with Pro-Voter Solutions that increase participation.
- We can all agree that the right to vote and to have our voices heard is a critical value of our democracy. Our democracy is fair and equal when every eligible American has the freedom to cast a vote and have it counted.
- Protecting the integrity of our electoral system should not be a partisan objective. It cannot be confused with partisan attempts to skew elections by complicating the rules for certain types of voters.
- In some states, voters concerned by the commission’s data request are removing themselves from registration rolls. Voters can trust their local election leaders and should remain registered. One of our most sacred rights and responsibilities to use our voices in democracy.
- Rather than get distracted by the sham commission’s one-sided investigation that will likely produce policy recommendations to restrict Americans’ freedom, we should continue to implement the pro-voter reforms already moving at the state level.
- There are common-sense steps we can take to safeguard our elections and Americans’ right to vote. In 2017 more than hundred bills have been introduced to improve access and participation in elections.
- This includes modernizing the voter registration process through continued expansion of online voter registration. Thirty-eight states and Washington, DC have adopted online voter registration—a 20-state increase since 2014.
- Additionally, ten states and DC have already adopted automatic voter registration, a reform that removes barriers to voter registration. Most recently, Illinois and Rhode Island have signed this pro-voter reform into law
- A study of Oregon’s automatic voter registration system demonstrates the effectiveness of these reforms. Hundreds of thousands of eligible voters were registered, making the voter rolls more representative of the state’s population.
- Early analysis of Vermont’s AVR system demonstrates that thousands more voters have claimed their right to vote since the law was implemented at the beginning of this year.
- Other reforms like early voting which is available in 37 states plus DC, same day registration (14 states plus DC), and rights restoration for people who have already repaid their debts to society are proven to increase opportunities to vote.
- Together, we can work with election leaders to make voting less complicated and more consistent across jurisdictions.
- Many have moved to implement the common-sense recommendations by a 2013 bipartisan commission and as a result have increased participation in their elections, improved reliability and security of the system, and lowered costs.
The sham commission has misplaced priorities and no credibility to carry out its mission.
- Our priority must be to ensure all eligible citizens have a voice in our democracy That starts by giving voters the confidence that politicians are safeguarding our elections, not rigging the system for their political gain. This commission has given voters no reason to believe it can accomplish this due to its partisan leadership, lack of transparency, and unwillingness to address election security from hacking threats.
- Perhaps most importantly, the Trump administration’s tepid reaction to white supremacy in Charlottesville has not prompted any commissioners to resign. These events alone should prompt all Americans who value freedom and equality to disassociate themselves from the White House.
- The sham commission’s request for voter data should be alarming to any American who values privacy, security, or integrity of our elections. A government official demanding extensive personal records of citizens without details on how the information will be used appropriately raises questions about motive and intent.
- COUNTERARGUMENT if pressed on election integrity and need for list maintenance: Maintaining accurate voter rolls to ensure eligible citizens can participate is a necessary goal but this commission has neither the expertise, resources, nor a history of honesty and integrity to ensure the process is conducted in a transparent, secure, and fair manner.
The commission is filled with individuals with a history of promoting restrictive voting policies
- The commission is led by Vice President Mike Pence who supported attacks on voter registration drives and earlier this summer a spokesperson recently stated the commission will run voter information “through a number of different databases,” a shady and vague assertion.
- Kris Kobach, the de facto leader of the commission, has requested massive amounts of private voter data. He has proven himself to be irresponsible with such information.
- Kobach has used a poorly engineered program called Interstate Crosscheck to eliminate hundreds of eligible voters from the voter rolls in the name of “cleaning up” the list. The cost to voters (literally and figuratively), is far greater than anything there is to gain from his crackpot analysis.
o He has masterminded anti-voter efforts and was fined $1,000 for making “patently misleading representations to the court” in a case about voting rights.
o In his own state of Kansas, Kobach has failed to prove widespread voter fraud and time after time the courts have struck down his voter suppression efforts.
- Hans Von Spakovsky and J. Christian Adams are the most extreme of partisans on the commission. J. Christian Adams has been called a bully by local election officials he has threatened lawsuits. The appointment of Hans Von Spakovsky raises more suspicions that this sham commission has a predetermined outcome.
o Von Spakovsky led a crusade at the Department of Justice targeting minority voters and has promoted voting laws that limit voter participation. He was deemed too controversial for appointment to the FEC and cannot be relied upon to be apolitical on any other election commission either.
- The Trump administration and allies around the country will use its members’ faulty methodology and foregone conclusions to recommend policies that are known to block eligible voters from participating in our democracy.
Background Documents on Commissioners
- Beehive Research has compiled research on each commissioner here. Email Devorah Adler at devorah@beehivedc.com for access.
- You can find more information about Kris Kobach from the Brennan Center, People For the American Way and ACLU. Good reporting from Allied Progress and Ari Berman for the New York Times Magazine.
Missteps by the commission reveal its overreach.
- Several state officials from both sides of the aisle have already expressed their confusion and disapproval at the data request from Kobach.
- Additionally, local election officials have reported a wave of demands from eligible voters to be removed from the rolls. State and local election leaders are the experts in election integrity and should be given the tools to keep data safe.
- We must foster confidence in our election system, not detract from it with opaque demands from a commission unwilling to address the real concerns facing our elections.
- Seven states are flatout refusing to provide any data to the commission. Eleven are imposing conditions prior to releasing data (all citing a fee requirement).
o Minnesota Secretary of State Scott Simon: “I will not be handing over Minnesota voters’ personal information to the Commission. I don’t think that any Minnesotan would ever have imagined when they registered to vote that such information would end up in some sort of ad hoc federal government database. Just as importantly, I have serious doubts about the Commission’s credibility and trustworthiness.”
o Marci Andino on behalf of the South Carolina Election Commission: “We concluded the |State Election Commission does not have the authority to provide publicly-available voter roll data to the PACEI.”
o Kobach himself admitted that, in his capacity as Kansas Secretary of State, privacy laws will prevent him from releasing the information he requested.
Running list of statements from election officials on Brennan Center’s resource page.
