IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/anname/v699y2022i1p22-35.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Democratic Capacity: Election Administration as Bulwark and Target

Author

Listed:
  • Lawrence R. Jacobs
  • Judd Choate

Abstract

Headlines decried the fragility of American democracy during the 2020 elections, but extensive institutional structures steered officials in both political parties to certify the results of the election, and independent judges have validated their decisions. Political battles over election laws and procedures are not themselves signs of democracy’s demise, because legal and administrative guardrails contain the degree to which voting rights are threatened. These formidable institutional structures blunted former president Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election and limited the scope and impact of new state legislation to restrict access to voting. The guardrails of elections operated as designed, but Trump’s unfounded charges of fraud coupled with state restrictions are corroding the credibility and fairness of elections. We examine the scope and function of election law and administration to understand how they protected American democracy in the contentious 2020 election.

Suggested Citation

  • Lawrence R. Jacobs & Judd Choate, 2022. "Democratic Capacity: Election Administration as Bulwark and Target," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 699(1), pages 22-35, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:699:y:2022:i:1:p:22-35
    DOI: 10.1177/00027162211061318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00027162211061318
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00027162211061318?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Enrico Cantoni & Vincent Pons, 2021. "Strict Id Laws Don’t Stop Voters: Evidence from a U.S. Nationwide Panel, 2008–2018," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(4), pages 2615-2660.
    2. Urbinati, Nadia, 2012. "Competing for Liberty: The Republican Critique of Democracy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 106(3), pages 607-621, August.
    3. Donald Moynihan, 2022. "Delegitimization, Deconstruction and Control: Undermining the Administrative State," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 699(1), pages 36-49, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Donald Moynihan, 2022. "Delegitimization, Deconstruction and Control: Undermining the Administrative State," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 699(1), pages 36-49, January.
    2. Ashley Jardina & Robert Mickey, 2022. "White Racial Solidarity and Opposition to American Democracy," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 699(1), pages 79-89, January.
    3. Robert C. Lieberman & Suzanne Mettler, 2023. "The Crisis of American Democracy in Historical Context," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 708(1), pages 122-136, July.
    4. Robert Mickey, 2022. "Challenges to Subnational Democracy in the United States, Past and Present," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 699(1), pages 118-129, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mauricio I. Dussauge-Laguna, 2022. "The promises and perils of populism for democratic policymaking: the case of Mexico," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(4), pages 777-803, December.
    2. Liu, Yinan & Zai, Xianhua, 2022. "The Benefits of Medicaid Home and Community-Based Services on Health," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1079, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    3. Amuedo-Dorantes, Catalina & Bucheli, Jose R., 2020. "Immigration Policy and Hispanics' Willingness to Run for Office," IZA Discussion Papers 13698, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Weiss, Amanda, 2024. "How Much Should We Trust Modern Difference-in-Differences Estimates?," OSF Preprints bqmws, Center for Open Science.
    5. Gilad, Sharon & Sulitzeanu-Kenan, Raanan & Levi-Faur, David, 2024. "Partisan Alignment and the Propensity to Choose a Job in a Government Ministry," SocArXiv ufzcj, Center for Open Science.
    6. Karthik Muralidharan & Paul Niehaus & Sandip Sukhtankar, 2020. "Identity Verification Standards in Welfare Programs: Experimental Evidence from India," NBER Working Papers 26744, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Liu, Yinan & Zai, Xianhua, 2022. "Does Aging at Home Make Older Adults Healthy: Evidence from Medicaid Home and Community-Based Services," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1079 [rev.], Global Labor Organization (GLO), revised 2022.
    8. Phoebe Henninger & Marc Meredith & Michael Morse, 2021. "Who Votes Without Identification? Using Individual‐Level Administrative Data to Measure the Burden of Strict Voter Identification Laws," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), pages 256-286, June.
    9. Apoorva Lal & Daniel M Thompson, 2023. "Did Private Election Administration Funding Advantage Democrats in 2020?," Papers 2310.05275, arXiv.org.
    10. Oliver Engist & Felix Schafmeister, 2022. "Do political protests mobilize voters? Evidence from the Black Lives Matter protests," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 193(3), pages 293-313, December.
    11. Andrea Bernini & Giovanni Facchini & Marco Tabellini & Cecilia Testa, 2024. "Sixty Years of the Voting Rights Act: Progress and Pitfalls," Economics Series Working Papers 1035, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:699:y:2022:i:1:p:22-35. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.