Tag: politics

‘Understaffed, underfunded, and under attack’

Published on by Behrend BlogLeave a comment

Alumnus, deputy director of elections in Michigan, to speak at Penn State Behrend Monday

adam fracassi speaker
Adam Fracassi-Wier, deputy director of elections for the state of Michigan.

Adam Fracassi-Wier, deputy director of elections at the Michigan Bureau of Elections, will discuss the state of elections and election security when the Speaker Series returns to Penn State Behrend at 7:30 p.m. Monday, Oct. 21. His talk, “Facing the Storm: Resilience in Elections after 2020,” will be held in the Metzgar Center. The program is free and open to the public.

Fracassi-Wier graduated from Penn State Behrend in 2012 with Bachelor of Arts degrees in Political Science, International Studies, and English. He earned his law degree from Michigan State University College of Law in 2014. His career includes serving as Michigan’s assistant attorney general from 2015 to 2018, as an adjunct professor at Michigan State University College of Law, and currently as deputy director of elections at the Michigan Bureau of Elections.

Behrend Blog talked with Fracassi-Wier to learn more about what it’s like to work in elections and election law in an increasingly partisan environment.

What are your biggest challenges right now?

Election administrators across the country are understaffed, underfunded, and under attack. This is the biggest challenge. We have to manage elections and election administration in a hyper-partisan environment that fuels misinformation, all while ensuring the safety of ourselves, our staff, other election officials, and poll workers. I’ve had to add different facets to my job that I never thought I would have to add. For example, I’m no longer just an attorney – I’ve had to add communications and marketing into my daily responsibilities.

What does it feel like to oversee election integrity when so many are distrustful of our elections today?

This is a heavy burden, especially in this era where misinformation and distrust are rampant.  Being a nonpartisan civil servant who ensures elections are fair is critical, but it brings risks and requires constant communication and transparency. I take very seriously my responsibility to ensure that every eligible citizen can vote while balancing it against the necessary security checks in the system. It’s hard when something you have dedicated your life to is constantly under threat, and things that you have always done because the law requires it, now are the things making you a target.

How do you fight that disinformation and assure voters that Michigan’s elections are secure?

Transparency and communication are vital. We have had a lot of success going to folks directly with messaging. What I’ve seen in the last four years is that many people are interested in the system but don’t understand it. I have allocated and created new resources in the last several years that are focused on providing educational materials and clearly communicating what we’re doing in advance of doing it. Engaging with voters directly and providing them with accurate information is key to building trust.

I’ve also had a lot of success by coordinating with local officials (clerks, township supervisors, etc.) on the messaging. In many instances, voters will trust their local officials.

The key is just to be a constant source of truth. I’ve been able to build trust with both Democrats and Republicans, voters and elected officials, because I’m consistent in what I do, and the decisions I make are not based on politics.

You secured a $40M budget increase to improve election operations in Michigan. What were you focused on improving?

Voters in 2022 passed a constitutional amendment that dramatically changed elections in Michigan. They implemented early in-person voting, mandated that drop boxes be available in all jurisdictions, and required the state to pay for the return of all absent voter ballots. But this required significant funding for us and the local clerks. I was very fortunate to be able to obtain $40 million to fund the constitutional amendment and the subsequent legislation that passed, but it wasn’t enough to fully fund our office and the local clerks’ offices.

Michigan has more than 1,600 township, city, and county clerks who all have different election roles. We are one of, if not the, most decentralized systems in the country for running elections. More than 900 clerks’ offices are single-precinct jurisdictions that likely have only one staff member—themselves.  This is not enough to run elections. When I sought funding, I sought approximately $125 million for our office and the local clerks.  Everyone thought I was crazy for asking for that, but I had the numbers to back me up. I obtained $40 million, and we spent it almost immediately, with more than $30 million being allocated to clerks directly. With this money, we were able to fund thirty-five additional staff members at the Bureau of Elections, more than doubling our staff.

Since 2020, clerks have seen the number of ballots being returned by mail more than double. We went from approximately 25 percent voting by mail to approximately 55 percent. The funding allocation allowed us to buy new equipment for clerks to account for this increase and ease processing. This funding also allowed us to build a new pollbook to be used to better detect and prevent double voting during the early voting period, buy equipment for clerks to administer early voting, and fund poll workers for jurisdictions.

What do you wish people knew about the election and election security?

Trust your election administrators. Almost every single election administrator – regardless of party affiliation – administers the election the same. We all believe in upholding the integrity of the election while ensuring that voters can exercise their most fundamental right of casting a ballot. If you have questions about the process or want to know more, contact your election official. Start that dialogue with them in a respectful manner, and you will find that they will engage and help you to the best of their ability.

It’s also important to know that there are backups for everything.  Michigan uses paper ballots, as do many other states. Even if you don’t have a paper ballot, there are still backup records to do recounts and audits. All of these are done to verify the accuracy of the results.

After 2020, our office conducted more than 250 audits across the state. The Auditor General audited our office, and the Senate Oversight Committee, led by Republican Senator Ed McBroom, examined everything as well. The audits showed that while there are always improvements to be made, the system worked as it should. We have not seen and do not continue to see massive voter fraud like what is suggested by several candidates.

Is there a better way to handle elections in the U.S.?

Our system is very similar to systems across the world. There are positives and negatives with every system, but I think a “better” way is dependent on the eye of the beholder. What you’re seeing in several states are different methods of electing officeholders that are affecting the policies, starting with redistricting.

Several states—Michigan included—have an independent redistricting commission that draws lines in a nonpartisan manner. In Michigan, this has resulted in a more evenly split legislature. Right now, democrats control both chambers, but only by two seats in each house. If either chamber flips, it would likely only be a two-to-four seat majority for either party.  This results in less partisan bills passing in several states.

Additionally, other states have changed from a plurality-based approach to rank choice voting, where voters rank the candidates in order of preference to ensure that whoever wins obtains a majority of support rather than a plurality.  Alaska has a system where everyone runs together in the primary and the top four vote earners advance to the general election, regardless of party, to run in a rank choice election.

Political Science student published in Wall Street Journal

Published on by Behrend BlogLeave a comment

By Heather Cass, Publications Manager, Penn State Behrend

Eric O - WSJ contributor
Eric Oelhaf, Penn State Behrend Political Science major.

While at Penn State Behrend, Eric Oelhaf, a senior Political Science major, added something to his resume that few college students can claim: His work has been published in The Wall Street Journal.

In fact, he has had three pieces published in the WSJ’s “Future View” column, in which they invite undergraduate and graduate students to offer their opinion on current topics from Twitter’s rebranding to the future of the NFL to foreign policy to ChatGPT.

Oelhaf’s published essays address the topics of American support for aid to Ukraine; the U.S. border crisis, and why people don’t trust scientists anymore. He is in good company with students from such institutions as Brown University, Harvard University, and West Point Academy.

We talked with Oelhaf, a State College native, to learn more about why he wanted to contribute, how he got published, and what he has gained from the experience.

How did you learn about “Future Views”?  

Dr. Maggie Shum, assistant professor of Political Science, mentioned it in a class that I took with her in the fall semester. Though it’s known to be a conservative publication, The Wall Street Journal said it was trying to provide a diversity of viewpoints in this feature.

Did you immediately contribute?

No. I looked at it as a national writing competition and decided that I was only going to contribute if I had something unique to say. I felt that would improve my odds of being selected. I was surprised that they printed the first one I submitted, which was the piece on the border crisis. The second one was the piece on why people don’t trust scientists.

Then you submitted one about aid for Ukraine?

Yes. That one was a strategic choice. I wanted to dispel myths that are prominent in conservative information spaces about the costs of sending aid to Ukraine. Of course, the reason to support Ukraine is that it’s the right thing to do. Russia has historically tried to eradicate the Ukrainian language and identity from existence since the times of the Russian Empire. And languages are a particularly important part of European political philosophy.

Does the newspaper edit the pieces?

The one on the border crisis is nearly identical to what I submitted, and those are really my thoughts on the matter. There was light editing on the Ukraine piece. But the trustworthiness of scientists’ piece was heavily edited. Looking back on that, I realize that was my fault.

How so?

I had tried to have a more in-depth discussion than what the 250-word-limit would allow, and I didn’t end up making a clear argument in what I originally submitted. The editor then rewrote some of it operating under the assumption that I was trying to critique the behavior of just the authority figures, which I wasn’t. It was a misunderstanding that I know now I could’ve prevented.

What has been the response to your work?

It’s interesting to read through the comments. I’ve learned that people will complain about anything unless your reasoning is airtight or in line with what they believe. I was called an elitist for providing context on the border crisis. Sometimes, readers will even complain that they are listening to college students, despite clicking on a column clearly labeled “Future View.”

What have you learned by reading the feedback?

It seems the current American news consumer is addicted to anger, and the media is more than happy to feed that addiction.

What other topics interest you?

I care most about what is happening in Ukraine and, as a result, I’m concerned about the current state of Congress. I’m also interested in artificial intelligence and the ways in which it’s being handled by our government.

What would people be surprised to know about your generation regarding politics?

My generation seems to care about efficacy to a greater degree than older ones. We want our politicians to be good at what they do. We don’t want them to continually take half measures on humanitarian crises cause by our allies, nor do we want them to spend six months trying to pass a budget.

What do you want to do after college?

I like foreign relations, so I may pursue a career in government in that field. I would certainly take a job in journalism, too, if I had the opportunity.

Oelhaf’s published pieces

Did you know?

Penn State faculty, staff, and students have access to The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal at no cost through the Student News Readership Program. To take advantage of this program, you must register using your Penn State email. Learn more at Penn State’s Student Affairs website.