Below is updated message guidance and talking points 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. This guidance is based on a recent nationwide poll conducted by Benenson Strategy Group to evaluate public sentiment and effective communications approaches.
Please do not share this confidential resource or any information contained herein with any external party without the express permission of ReThink Media.
Context
A significant number of voters are concerned about the security of our elections, with many expressing concerns about fraud and illegal voting. This is consistent with several polls and research conducted over the last year before and after Trump was elected. In the Benenson polling, 82% support a government commission that professes to investigate fraud and illegal voting. When tied to Trump, and by using the talking points below, support for the commission falls to 48%. Note that this poll and its numbers/findings are confidential and not for public reference or discussion.
Goals for Audiences
-
For Everyone: Highlight the flawed nature of the commission and the fact that it is focused on the wrong issues and led by the wrong people.
-
For Base/Mobilization Audiences Only: Emphasize how Trump, Pence and Kobach are using this moment to rig elections in their favor and strip away voting rights.
-
For Everyone: Offer solutions that actually improve the security and fairness of our elections.
Do’s and Don’ts
- DO soothe voters’ concerns about safeguarding our elections before addressing the problems with the commission. For example, We need to safeguard our votes and voting systems…
- DON’T call this the “voter fraud commission,” “voter suppression commission, or “so-called ‘election integrity’ commission.” This feeds the opposition’s narrative and puts us on the defensive. We should also avoid terminology like "sham" or "bogus.” Instead, tie the commission to Trump and Pence (and Kobach) whose association with the commission undermines its credibility. For example, Trump's commission or the Pence-Kobach commission.
- DO emphasize that the commission is focused on the wrong things and led by the wrong people who aren’t even considering solutions to the problems like hacking and tampering.
- DON’T make this partisan or tied to partisan politics. Framing that turns this into “Democrats vs. Republicans” plays into the opposition’s narrative.
- DO propose solutions. Simply being against the commission is not enough. Although voters distrust Trump, if we offer no alternative then they are still more likely to support the commission. We have to offer solutions that address their concerns. Make sure to propose solutions that address the real security threats (e.g., hacking and tampering) we face.
- DON'T use academic studies as validators or proof points. In some instances, citing court decisions and cases can be more compelling.
- DON’T use acronyms and/or jargon. Avoid insider-speak and inaccessible terminology that can confuse or alienate your audience.
- DO point, when applicable, to specific state and local election officials in your area as the best-qualified to address the voting needs of your community.
- DON'T argue the commission should be disbanded. Instead, note that the commission is focused on the wrong things and led by the wrong people.
Talking Points
About These Approaches: Two Distinct Threads
We have two distinct threads we can use. We should pick one for our communication and not try to do both at the same time.
- Thread #1 (for Everyone): This Commission is a huge privacy threat to voters. If the Commission wants to secure elections, why are they ignoring election tampering and hacking? They aren’t even considering solutions like mandatory audits, Automatic Verification and Registration to improve accuracy and early warning systems to stop potential hackers.
- Thread #2 (for Base/Mobilization Audiences ONLY): We can't let politicians use this moment to write even more rules to rig elections in their favor. They are trying to remove American citizens from voter rolls and put up barriers to voting for eligible voters. The courts have already said what they are trying to do is illegal: stripping eligible voters of their rights based on the color of their skin.
We know that these threads might seem similar, but they are quite different. Thread #1 focuses on the risks to security and the substance that the commission is missing—and is intended for a broad audience that is concerned about security but also initially unsure how they feel about the commission. The second, which deals with the political side of the commission, is aimed at mobilizing our base and is NOT effective with a broader audience. While there is some overlap between the threads (e.g., both threads have sections on solutions), our goal should be to try to not cross the unique elements of these threads—and the unique needs of each of our audiences—as we deploy commission-related public education and advocacy strategies in our states.
Thread #1 - For Broad Audiences
The commission has focused on the wrong issues and is led by the wrong people.
- We need to safeguard our votes and voting systems, but this commission is focused on the wrong issues and led by the wrong people.
- The commission is focused on self-serving policies, not real solutions. Its only idea is to purge eligible voters from the rolls and make voting more complicated.
- If the commission wants to secure elections, why are they ignoring concerns about election tampering and hacking? The Department of Homeland Security and multiple agencies reported that foreign interests tried to tamper with the 2016 elections, yet the commission isn't considering solutions like mandatory audits and early warning systems to stop potential hackers.
The commission is putting the privacy of voter data at risk.
- This commission is also a huge privacy threat to voters. Its first action was to request full names, birth dates, voting records, and Social Security numbers from every voter in America for a giant federal government database. State leaders from both parties have denounced the commission's actions, and at least 7 lawsuits have been filed against it.
- Maintaining accurate voter rolls to ensure that eligible voters can vote 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.
We need solutions that safeguard our election system.
- The Commission only supports solutions that take eligible voters off the voting rolls, but it opposes measures like Automatic Voter Registration that improve the accuracy of voter lists and safeguard our elections with more secure technology. If this Commission really wanted to safeguard our elections, they would consider solutions that allow every eligible American to vote while also having a secure election system.
- Together, we can work with election leaders to make voting more secure, less complicated, and consistent across jurisdictions. Many states have already moved to implement the common-sense recommendations by a 2013 bipartisan commission and as a result have improved reliability and security of the system, lowered costs, and helped ensure that eligible voters can make their voices heard in elections.
Thread #2 - For Base/Mobilization Audiences
The commission is filled with people who have a history of promoting restrictive voting policies.
- Americans across the country understand that our election system needs to be updated. But we can’t let politicians use this moment to write even more rules to rig elections in their favor, and allow they to pick and choose who gets to vote. We need elections that are secure and fair.
- The commission isn't about integrity — it's about politics. Donald Trump and his hand-picked commissioners are trying to remove American citizens from voter rolls and put up barriers to voting for eligible voters. Our election system needs to be update, but we can't let politicians change the rules to benefit themselves.
- This commission can't bring integrity to elections when it's led by two men, hand-picked by President Trump, who have a history of writing election rules that infringe on people's voting rights. Vice President Pence fought efforts to register young voters in 2016 and Kris Kobach has cut eligible voters from the rolls and lost over a dozen court cases because he prevents legal votes from being cast.
- They are trying to remove American citizens from voter rolls and put up barriers to voting for eligible voters. Efforts to remove eligible American voters from state voter lists if they haven't voted in several elections or cannot be reached by mail undermine the integrity of our elections.
- The courts have already said what they are trying to do is illegal: stripping eligible voters of their rights based on the color for their skin. In North Carolina and Texas, federal courts struck down laws that were intentionally designed to stop African Americans and Latinos from voting.
We need solutions that safeguard our election system and ensure every eligible voter can make their voice heard.
- If the commission wants to secure elections, why are they ignoring concerns about election tampering and hacking? The Department of Homeland Security and multiple agencies reported that foreign interests tried to tamper with the 2016 elections, yet the commission isn't considering solutions like mandatory audits and early warning systems to stop potential hackers.
- The commission is focused on self-serving policies, not real solutions. It's not even considering common-sense measures like mandatory election audits, automatic voter registration to improve the accuracy of voter lists, and technology to prevent tampering. Its only idea is to purge eligible voters from the rolls and make voting more complicated.
- Together, we can work with election leaders to make voting more secure, less complicated, and consistent across jurisdictions. Many states have already moved to implement the common-sense recommendations by a 2013 bipartisan commission and as a result have improved reliability and security of the system, lowered costs, and helped ensure that eligible voters can make their voices heard in elections.
Elevator Pitch/Soundbite
We need to safeguard our votes and voting systems, but the commission is focused on self-serving policies, not real solutions. It's not even considering common-sense measures like mandatory elections audits, Automatic Voter Registration to improve the accuracy of voter lists, and improved technology to prevent tampering. Its only idea is to purge eligible voters from the rolls and make voting harder.
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.
