David Levine Politico oped:

But supporters of the bill should stop claiming that the 2022 elections may be “illegitimate” if it does not pass — an argument that President Joe Biden and other top Democrats have at least hinted at recently. For three reasons, democracy proponents should realize that such comments could only hurt their cause. Instead, they should be cheering on the nascent bipartisan efforts in Congress to overhaul the 19th-century Electoral Count Act and take other steps to ensure democracy can prevail.

First, rhetoric decrying illegitimate elections can further erode electoral trust and kick democracy toward a death spiral. We saw this on Jan. 6, 2021, when a group of Trump supporters became so convinced of election fraud that they were willing to physically attack Congress to prevent the results from being ratified. A genuine democracy doesn’t work this way — instead, it depends on losers accepting election results, even if the rules governing the election are imperfect. The last thing we need is Democrats, too, ginning up panicked opposition to the 2022 or 2024 results. Clearly, not everyone currently holding public office, or seeking it in 2022, is committed to free and fair elections. That is a deeply worrisome truth. But we should reserve illegitimate election allegations for conduct more outrageous than resistance to federal voting rights legislation; opposing a bill is neither illegal nor contrary to the rule of the law.

Second, the illegitimate election claim would be unproven. Although a number of states enacted provisions last year that unnecessarily limit voter access or inject additional chaos into the vote counting and certification process, it is a big stretch to say that will inevitably lead to a stolen election. Arguing that some legislators are making it harder to vote and count the ballots and dismissing an election as illegitimate are two very different things. Furthermore, making charges that cannot be proven undermines the genuine complaints about opposition to federal voting rights legislation. If supporters can’t prove that the legislation’s failure will lead to a stolen election, some people will think that the legislation’s defeat was no big deal. That would be a real shame.

This leads directly to the third problem with illegitimate election rhetoric: It focuses on the wrong issue. The question isn’t whether an unsuccessful piece of legislation could have protected future elections; it’s why so many lawmakers in one of our two major parties opposes legislation to address real threats to the integrity of our elections. Republican arguments about the “federal takeover” of federal elections and claims of instilling public confidence are bogus, and that needs to keep being said.

By focusing on the dignity and respect that should be afforded to each voter and election official, we can push to maximize the number of guardrails that are in place to ensure a free and fair election, regardless of election outcomes.

Rather than questioning the legitimacy of future elections, pro-democracy supporters should focus their near-term efforts on how to ensure the successful counting of ballots and certification of elections going forward. Reforming the Electoral Count Act to prevent Congress or rogue state officials from overturning the will of the people would be a positive step. So would other measures to aid election workers, such as greater protections against partisan removal, abuse and harassment.