Ep. 12: Rachel Orey, BPC Senior Associate Director, Elections Project

The Ballot Box Briefing is a weekly segment on Sirius XM’s The Briefing, that examines the issues and storylines at the heart of running an efficient and accurate election. Guests include election administrators, local, state, and federal officials, cybersecurity experts, legal analysts, and members of BPC’s Democracy Program.

Rachel Orey joined the Ballot Box Briefing to discuss findings from the first 50-state analysis of local election official turnover. In partnership with scholars at UCLA, BPC’s new report finds that turnover has been steadily increasing for two decades across the country, but also underscores that the elections workforce is well-prepared to administer safe and secure elections in 2024.

Transcript

The following interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.

Rachel Orey (RO): This report came out of increasing conversation about the election workforce. These are the folks that are responsible for running our elections day in and day out around the country. In light of increasing threats and challenges facing this workforce since 2020, there’s been a lot of speculation that turnover has increased since the 2020 election. A lot of folks have collected data to indicate that turnover has been high since 2020, but we’ve never had historical context. So we wanted to answer that question, and we partnered with two academics, Joshua Ferrer and Daniel M. Thompson from UCLA, who have been working on collecting a dataset of local election officials that goes back to the year 2000. So we’ve been able to track turnover among local election officials going back over two decades.

Steve Scully (SS): And you know, over the last few months, as we’ve been doing this program, we’ve been checking in with Democratic and Republican secretaries of state. They have said look, these are civil servants–often volunteers–on election day; they don’t get paid a lot of money, and yet now they are being targeted by so many individuals who don’t trust the work that they do without evidence.

RO: Yeah, these individuals certainly have been targeted in an increased fashion since the 2020 election. I will clarify, though, that we are focusing specifically on election staff. So those are the typically full-time employees who are responsible for running elections throughout the year. There’s this preconception that election officials only have to work, you know, one day every couple of years, when they’re running a big presidential election. In reality, the work of running an election takes all year long, and many states and jurisdictions have elections throughout the year in addition to the big, high-turnout presidential elections. And these are the folks who are most at risk of turnover and the ones who really are responsible for making sure our elections are secure and have integrity. These are also the ones that tend to be the recipients of threats and harassment. So we wanted to make sure those folks are front and center in this report.

SS: By the way, the full report is available at bipartisanpolicy.org. Rachel, as you look at the turnover of these workers–these civil servants who are full time employees at the local and regional level–you attribute it to what?

RO: The primary finding of our report is that turnover among local election officials has been increasing pretty steadily since 2000. Now, this is contrary to the narrative that we’ve heard that turnover among election officials is primarily a result of those post-2020 stressors. Things like threats and harassment against election officials and increasing workloads that result from the scrutiny being placed on election offices. But really what we understand to be the root causes of turnover are those chronic stressors, things like underfunding of election administration. Elections are routinely underfunded. Election officials are often paid less than other county officials within the same jurisdiction. And yet the workload of an election official has gotten increasingly significant and challenging, particularly since the 2016 election. Election officials are expected to be communications experts and cybersecurity experts; they’re managing H.R., they have huge staff, including staff that change throughout the year. So, the expectations on election officials are increasing. But when they don’t have the resources to increase their staff, it often falls on those individuals who are already there.

SS: I love hearing you speak about this because I’ve been in meetings where you’re talking about this. You are passionate about this, where does it come from? Why is this your issue?

RO: That’s a great question. I spend a lot of time all year long traveling to different places around the country where I get to meet and interact with election officials. My number one takeaway is that they are some of the most dedicated public servants. They care so much—in light of all the increased challenges that they’ve been facing, they get the job done. And honestly, I think that’s part of the problem. They always get the job done, and they’re scrappy and they’re resourceful and we take them for granted. They have shouldered us through some of the most tumultuous periods of our democracy to date. I think it’s our turn to do the same for them.

SS: And so as you travel as you talk, keeping in mind that elections are run by local officials and state officials, what are they telling you about policy solutions? What more can or should be done?

RO: The number one thing that state and federal legislators can do going into the 2024 election is adequately provide resources for election administration, including competitive compensation for election officials. Salary ranges for these public servants have remained pretty steady over the last two decades, and even decreasing when you adjust for inflation. And this is in contrast to the increasing workloads. So that’s the number one thing—adequate resources and increased compensation. That said, I think it’s wrong to put the focus only on stopping turnover. Turnover, when it’s stable, is a healthy part of any profession, and election administration should be well equipped to handle high periods of turnover without atrophying from the loss of experienced staff. So there are some things that we can do to make election administration more resilient to periods of high turnover. That includes things like strong training programs. The majority of states have training programs for election officials, but we can improve the quality of instruction. We can make those training programs required. We can also do things like create election procedures manuals–just having one central document that the state creates every year that has rules for how elections should be conducted. This seems like a bare minimum, but it’s surprising the amount of states that don’t have that kind of central document, which means election officials are often left on their own to interpret this increasingly complex web of legislation and litigation that impact how elections should be run.

SS: So as somebody who is taking the lead on the election project here, my sense knowing you is that you are a “glass half full” optimist. As you look at the landscape in 2024 on the state and local level, how do you view all of this? What are your thoughts?

RO: I am extremely confident going into the 2024 election and I don’t think that’s just because I’m an optimist. I think our data supports this finding as well. So while turnover was higher in 2022 than it was at any point over the last two decades, this was generally on trend with the average rate of turnover that we saw. That alone indicates that the field of election administration is well prepared to weather some degree of turnover. In addition, there are numerous counterbalancing factors that should give us confidence going into November. Number one—65% of local election officials have experience running a presidential election. That is the majority of local election officials—more than 10,000 folks around the country—who know what it’s like to run a high-stakes, high-turnout presidential election that’s under a lot of public scrutiny. Additionally, even when we have 35% who will be running their first presidential election, our research shows that those individuals have significant prior experience. They have on average of eight years of experience running elections, typically in a role like a deputy, supporting that main official. When you’re looking at just large jurisdictions, that jumps to 11 years on average of prior experience. So we know that even new officials have experience in an election office. Finally, like I mentioned before, the vast majority of states—currently 43—have statewide training programs available to election administrators, meaning that the folks who are running our elections know what they’re doing. They’re well prepared, they’re experienced, they have support from others in their states who have experience and can help educate them on new policies. Where the issues really lie are in how candidates and members of the public talk about and perceive elections. I think that’s where we have more room to grow. We know that this workforce is experienced and dedicated, and I think it’s on us now to do our part to support them and really share the message that elections are secure and trustworthy nationwide.

SS: Such great information. It does provide a counter narrative to what we’re often hearing from others in the media, did anything else surprise you in this report that just came out this week?

RO: I think that was the big thing; the number one surprising factor was that it had been increasing steadily over the past two decades. We really expected to see a big jump after the 2020 election, but really, we saw that many, many election officials are staying in their role. I think that goes back to this point that election officials are dedicated to the preservation of our democracy, and they’re willing to stay the course in spite of all the challenges that they’ve been facing in recent years.

SS: And Rachel, finally, a question that we’re asking all of our guests here on the program: If there is one thing that you wish people would better understand or knew about elections, one thing, what would it be?

RO: I would go back to this point that election officials are some of the most dedicated public servants I know. They’re scrappy, they’re resourceful. They get the job done in the most extreme circumstances, like for example, the global pandemic. That said, the burdens that they face take a toll. A lot of the election officials I speak to on a regular, if not daily basis, are tired. They’re burning out. They’re doing the job, but it’s taking a toll on their emotional health. So when you go to a polling place to cast your vote, I would encourage you to be appreciative, to say thank you to the election officials that are there. And then also to just be a spokesperson in your community. Election officials are the best source for authoritative election information, but they can’t talk to everyone all at once. They need help from folks who understand how elections work, understand that our elections are secure and trustworthy, and to be those folks, people to their community, to their family, to their friends.

SS: Really good information, Rachel. Thank you for stopping by, and check out the report.

RO: Thanks so much, Steve.