I Hate Federal Commissions, But Americans Need One To Look Into The 2020 Election – JONATHAN TURLEY

I Hate Federal Commissions, But Americans Need One To Look Into The 2020 Election – JONATHAN TURLEY

One of the people I follow is Jonathan Turley, Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors. I first heard about Turley when he testified during the Trump impeachment hearings. Although Turley is a Republican he stated during the hearing that he did not vote for Trump in 2016. He also has frequently criticized Trump in his blog. From reading his blog posts I've concluded that he tries to be objective.

In the aftermath of the January 6, 2021 Trump rally in which some of his supporters stormed the Capitol Turley posted his call for a federal commission to look into the 2020 election. I've extracted several key quotes below.

I hate federal commissions. I have always hated federal commissions. Federal commissions are Washington’s way of managing scandals. They work like placebos for political fevers, convincing voters that answers and change are on the way. That is why it is so difficult for me to utter these words: We need a federal election commission. Not the one proposed by some Senate Republicans. And not like past placebo commissions. An honest-to-God, no-holds-barred federal commission to look into the 2020 presidential election.

          ... 

There are three reasons why the need for a real commission is needed:

►First, and most important, this was an unprecedented election in the reliance of mail-in voting and the use of new voting systems and procedures. We need to review how that worked down to the smallest precincts and hamlets.

►Second, possibly tens of millions of voters believe that this election was rigged and stolen. I am not one of them. However, the integrity of our elections depends on the faith of the electorate.

Roughly 40% of that electorate have lingering doubts about whether their votes actually matter. Most of the cases challenging the election were not decided on the merits. Indeed, it seems they haven’t even been allowed for discovery. Instead, they were largely dismissed on jurisdictional or standing groups or under the “laches” doctrine that they were brought too late. Those allegations need to be conclusively proven or disproven in the interests of the country.

►Third, there were problems. There was not proof of systemic fraud or irregularities, but there were problems of uncounted votes, loss of key custodial information and key differences in the rules governing voting and tabulations.

We have spent billions to achieve greater security and reliability after prior election controversies. Indeed, we had a prior election commission that failed to achieve those fundamental goals.

...

The stakes are too high to allow even a dust particle to tip the difference on the ultimate findings. The dust-free option requires a dependent, not independent, commission. Otherwise, the public will be the loser.

So, let’s have a commission, but let’s make it a real one.

Turley admits that if a commission is appointed (which I find highly unlikely) it will take years to complete its work. Therefore it won't satisfy those who question the validity of the 2020 election. I agree with Turley's reasons for investigating the current voting procedures, especially the mail-in ballots and the Dominion voting machines. If we, the voting public, are to trust that our vote truly counts we need to believe that our vote is being counted.