Announcer :BackStory is made possible in part by KeyBank.

With additional support from the League of Women Voters and by viewers like you.

Thank you.

(Music) Jason Hibbs: Today on BackStory, we're talking about recession, no, not economics, but a decline in democracy, and we have the creator of something called the State Democracy Index.

It was modeled after something called Vidim, which many say is the gold standard for measuring democrac around the world.

Dr Jake Grumble is a researcher and assistant professor of political science at the University of Washington Doctor, before the show, you said I could call you Jake.

So, Jake, it's good to have you.

Jake Grumbach: Great to be with you.

Jason Hibbs: So how does this index that you created work and why are you focusing on the states instead of the federal government?

Jake Grumbach: That's a great question.

So the first thing, as you said, there's a long tradition in political science and other social sciences of quantitatively and statistically measuring the health of democracies around the world and looking around the world.

Now we see potential democratic decline and backsliding in countries like Brazil or Hungary, as well as the U.S.

But in the U.S., one really important difference is that the American political system has an especially decentralized form of federalism, which puts the rules of democracy like election law and voting rights and gerrymandering and districting and vote counting all at the state level constitutionally.

So that's where we have to look to see the health of American democracy.

Jason Hibbs: So what were your findings across the world and in the states?

Jake Grumbach: Right.

So as threats to democracy are arising around the world, we se similarly threats to democracy arising in U.S. states.

So I developed this measure using 61 different variables or indicators of states, election administration and election law, how long it takes the average person to vote when they go to a polling place whether there's good access to mail ballots or same day voter registration, whether districts are gerrymandered in one biased way to support one party over the other and develop this measure since 2000 to gauge the health of democracy in the states.

And you see some states performing pretty well, and you see others over the past decade especially really struggling and declining in their Democratic performance as they draw districts that are unfair and biased in forms of gerrymandering, and they make it more costly and difficult to vote.

Jason Hibbs: With those 61 indicators, are there a few that you're seeing, you know, common themes among the states?

Jake Grumbach: Yes, that's a really good question.

So the most important indicators in the statistical model.

So the first thing is that I don't choose sort of how to weight these different indicators.

So I use a statistical model where the data really tells me, OK, how much does gerrymandering affect a state's democracy?

The statistical model helps to bring that out.

And what this statistical model shows is that gerrymandered districts are especially important for a stat or a Democratic performance on this measure, as well as some other election policies, like having No-Fault absentee voting, that somebody, anyone, no matter what type of individual or their age or health condition, can request an absentee ballot if they don't need to go physically to a polling place.

So items like that, indicators like that really shape a state's democracy score.

And since 2010, especially, I just want to emphasize, there's been some really important redistricting that has made districts biased in favor of one party over the other.

And that tends to be the strongest influence on a state's democracy score during this period.

Jason Hibbs: How about Ohio?

How are we doing?

Jake Grumbach: So Ohio's sort of in that.

It started out pretty strong and it's seen some decline over the past decade.

It's still not one of the lowest democracy performers.

But after the 2010 redistricting cycle, gerrymandered districts that favored the Republican Party in Ohio was one reason that Ohio State democracy score declined.

And with redistricting now on the agenda, again, as the census puts out its new population numbers.

Ohio has the chance to really improve its sort of Democratic performance by drawing fair districts that give every legislative candidate, state legislature through the U.S. House a fair shot at a competitive districts across parties, not packing one party's voters into some districts and efficiently spreading out others across other districts.

Jason Hibbs: And some of the indicators involve how one goes about registering to vote, right?

Jake Grumbach: That's exactly right.

So there's a number of different systems across states.

So some states traditionally allow somebody to optionally register to vote when they get a new driver's license at a DMV.

Others automatically register everyone to vote when they move to the state and register a new address and get a driver's license in the state or some other form of identification.

And then there's others that offer additional checks a same day, voter registration option, where if all else fails and you happen to not be registered but you go to the polling place and you really want to vote, you can fill out a provisional ballot where you vote there and then you register in that process and then they register and count your vote.

Sort of at the same time.

And then you're registere for other elections.

So all of those are opportunities to expand sort of access to voting through registration and actually casting your ballot.

Jason Hibbs: Jake, you know very well that a lot of people say expanded access leads to fraud.

They don't always have proof to back that claim up, but that's what they say.

How do you know you have the right indicators?

I don't know if the members of the popular of the public would agree that those are the right indicators.

Jake Grumbach: Right.

So that's a great point, Jason.

So the first thing is it's I want to say how difficult it is to create sort of an objective measure of democracy for any political system, whether it's, you know, Hungary, Russia, Brazil, you know, China and United States, nationally or by state.

So typically, Democratic theorists in the social science theorize sort of access to the ballot, competitive elections, free and fair elections, and unbiased districting and legislative in legislative district and to be key to democracy.

But this is other people may have different sort of weights, you know, whether they emphasize districts or certain election administrative procedures, emphasize them more than others And importantly, in the appendix of my paper, what I do statistically is I simulate hundreds of thousand of different measures of democracy to say, OK, somebody might really care about automatic voter registration, somebody else might really care about mail balloting.

Somebody else might really care about district.

All of those generally can create a distribution of measures.

And across those measure, you see very similar sort of rankings.

Ohio's stays in the same place, really, regardless of how you weight those items.

Now to your second.

Yeah, go ahead.

So your question, Jason, about fraud, that's a really important question.

So the first thing to say is that there's a tremendous number of election audits and scholarship to detect electoral or voting fraud where somebody votes based on a identity that's not theirs or a deceased person's identity or votes in the wrong two times right across jurisdictions or in the same jurisdiction.

Those are all crimes punished by severe penalties.

And if, you know, if you've ever tried to get somebody to vote who doesn't really want to vote you know how hard it is to get somebody to vote in general.

It's actually really hard to get somebody to threaten their freedom and put them at risk of criminal prosecution to vote For example, multiple times or with a deceased person's identity.

And then research that statistically quantifies the extent of this voter fraud finds that voter fraud is so minuscule that it i literally impossible for it to sway an election.

With that said, there are different security procedures for mail balloting, for in-person balloting, absentee overseas military ballots.

All of these have different security procedures, but states around the country have different forms of them.

And they've.

All done them quite successfully with no fraud.

So really, Ohio's really has an opportunity to choose all among all of these sort of electoral procedures.

Absentee mail balloting, Same-Day, voter registration, automatic voter registration, and not be at risk of fraud.

Jason Hibbs: How are we doing in the US compared to the rest of the world?

Jake Grumbach: So the US is still a globe, despite challenges of hyperpolarization, of sort of scorched earth tactics in the national government and in state legislatures across the country, gerrymandered districts, attacks on sort of voting rights.

The US is still a pretty robust democracy.

It has been a global leader in expanding democracy and expanding the franchise to first to non property owning white men, then African-Americans and women.

This has been important around the world that the U.S. has been a leader in democracy.

Right now, it's at risk of slipping to a pretty OK democracy.

I wouldn't call it slipping towards full authoritarianism or something like that, as we know from illiberal authoritarian regimes around the world.

But it's really losing its status as Democratic leader in this way, as state legislatures and state governments, especially gerrymandered districts, and reduced access to the ballot and threaten to subvert future elections by not providing, for example, in a presidential election.

The winner of the state's electorate not providing the Electoral College votes to that corresponding presidential candidate.

And that's arisen as a new risk in a few states recently.

Jason Hibbs: In a minute, I want to ask you about Covid, because that, of course, has changed everything, but we've got to get a quick break in here.

For those of you at home, I want you to grab your cell phone, get ready to take a photo, because we are going to show you some Web sites where you can go and learn more about this.

We'll be back with more back story in just a moment.

New Caption Welcome back to BACKSTORY, we are speaking with Dr Jake Graha Bok about democracy across the world and in the US and some warning signs that democracy is in decline.

Wanted to talk a little bit about Covid and how that has contributed or maybe accelerated the decline of democracy across the world.

Jake Grumbach: Thanks, Jason.

Yeah.

So typically crises that involve war, public health and economic catastrophe and Covid really combine this public health crisis with economic catastrophe that can really strain political systems and cause individuals to turn to more potentially radical political options and against sort of the traditional rules of a political system.

So we see a bit of that threat.

But overall, it's also just really shown in some ways, in some ways some difficult signs that it's hard to tackle national and global problems through the American political system.

But also, it's shown some progress that at the national level, some of these economic stabilizers for people who are essential workers or people who have been out of work during this time period, they have been successful in maintaining some economic stability.

So that is a hopeful sign.

But it has been a challenge for election administrators who have put in a tremendous amount of work.

County and state election administrators are heroes during Covid going with masks and PPE to in-person ballot locations and expanding really quickly, trying to expand access to mail ballots.

So you look at some states that switched entirely to mail balloting in twenty twenty.

That was very difficult for administrators, and they pulled it off almost flawlessly, which is very commendable.

And I think this is a sign I've written about this in some of my research, that this is a sign that moving towards mail balloting as an important form of voting in the U.S. is probably going to expand.

And that would be a secure and sort of fair and equitable and accessible way to vote for many people going into the 2020 Jason Hibbs: In the US and your research, you identify Republican control of state governments as the main driver of erosion of Democratic performance.

What is the difference between Republican and Democratic control of a state?

Jake Grumbach: That's a great question, Jason.

So when I say control of a state, I mean, it's state legislature and its governor are controlled by a single party.

So a unified red state or a unified blue state or a divided state where the parties control different chambers, the legislature and governor are controlled by different parties.

What you see is that since 2000 and especially 2010, states control just by Republicans.

Unified Republican states have tended to reduce their Democratic performance by, again, drawing unfair legislative districts and restricting access to the ballot, making it more costly to vote.

But this is in this particular time period.

This is sort of driven by the Republican Party in the states.

But it's important to say parties that two American political parties have taken different stances on democracy throughout American history.

So up until the 1970s or so, the Democratic Party was, for the most part, the mai sort of blocher of expanding democracy, especially in the US South Southern Democrats during the Jim Crow period.

So this changes over time.

And it may not be the case that the Republican Party will be driving Democratic backsliding in the future.

And that remains uncertain and to be seen.

Jason Hibbs: Is there anything you're watching in the Democratic Party right now that troubles you?

Jake Grumbach: I would say not particularly.

There's some of the issues where politicians of all stripes, of all parties don't like changing the electorate that voted them into office.

So I do see sometimes at the state and local level, especially at the local level.

Some Democratic incumbents don't like expanding voting and expanding the primary elections process to bring in new young voters who may vote differently.

You do see some of that.

However, just in this particular political moment, for whatever reason, the Democratic Party is not sort of a main threat to democracy at any level.

Jason Hibbs: So there's a statement of concern signed by more than 200 scholars written in very plain language.

And it states that American democracy is in danger and that something needs to happen right now.

Your name is on that.

You sign that document.

Can you tell us a little bit about that?

Jake Grumbach: Absolutely.

So that was done through the bipartisan New America Foundation.

And there's been a number of other statements of concern about Democratic decline in the U.S. And for those of us who, you know, we study this with our life and livelihoods, and this is our main career and also personal interests.

We thought as sort of we are typically impartial, sort of scientific observers of these processes, but it's important to sort of ring the alarm when our sort of scientific consensus starts to see that there are emerging threats and that those in political power, politicians, legislatures, judges should be aware of democratic decline and the importance of national policy at this moment, the importance of passing new national policy to safeguard elections and to ensure that legislative districts are drawn fairly, especially on the cusp of this new redistricting cycle for the 2020 is going forward.

Jason Hibbs: Of course, some will say, well, that should be up to the states.

Congress shouldn't be making laws like that that that, you know, are forcing something upon the states.

What do you say to that?

Jake Grumbach: That's been a tension throughout American history.

Going back to the founding and going back to the Federalist Papers of James Madison, for example, where there's been a tension, where the US Constitution has put most of this authority at the state level.

But throughout history, states have done a really dangerous and destructive things towards democracy through enforcing slavery.

And then later, segregation and Jim Crow and banning it was states banned women from voting or non property owning white men as well.

And Native Americans.

These were things that the national government through Congress, typically, sometimes through the Supreme Court in small parts of American history.

But for the most part, it's been Congress that has stepped up and said no more and has sort of invalidated state laws.

For example, Jim Crow voting laws through policies like the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

And now on the agenda, there are a new series of sort of voting rights style acts and democracy reforms that would do additional things like banning gerrymandered districts.

And ensure that elections are counted in presidential electio chains of succession and things like that and other security procedures.

Those appear to be necessary, given what scholars like myself are finding over the last decade in terms of state policymaking around democracy and threats to democracy coming from states Jason Hibbs: Are there any negatives to having national standards?

Jake Grumbach: Yeah, so this is a really tough tradeoff here.

So at one level, you worry that if you centralize election administration and say, OK, a national agency will take mor authority and developing national rules for elections, who's allowed to vote and not how registration happens for voting, that then a potential autocrat or wannabe dictator could come in and sort of take over that centralized agency in D.C. and make it sort of a, you know, dero under their own control.

And that would be quite dangerous.

But at the same time, the tradeoff is that now you have we have 50 states and some are at risk and have already experienced some serious backsliding.

So this is a tradeoff here.

How much centralization you want.

And I think what we're seeing is in a time period like now, just like in the 1965 Voting Rights Act, the time is right to centralize some elements of democracy and election administration through Congress, potentially not all of them there.

As I mentioned, they're inspiring work from state and county election administrators across the country, especially in the Covid period.

At the same time, what we're really seeing is the need for national standards and bass lines around some of these issues.

Jason Hibbs: So you're a researcher and a professor.

You're in the classroom.

How do students respond to these conversations?

Jake Grumbach: So I've noticed that especially here at the University of Washington, I go Huskies students are extremely interested in issues of American politics and they see a number of crises on the horizon.

So my young sort of Gen Z students, they're concerned about climate change.

They're concerned about gun violence and mass shootings in schools.

They're concerned about their economic prospects and inability to own a home the way their parents and grandparents did.

All of these are giving them quite a bit of stress about the American political system.

And what they've seen is some really strong rhetoric from political leaders sometimes, but often not a whole lot of national policy change to solve these issues.

And that's increase their level of frustration.

And I worry to just incorporate these young people into the political system.

They need to have responsive political leaders.

And one issue like decentralized federalism in the American political system is that's different about the U.S. compared to other wealthy democracies around the world.

Is the US has separation of powers where they have a Senate, a U.S. House of Representatives, a Supreme Court and the president, and basically any one of those chambers or institutions can block national laws.

So it's really important to think about how difficult it is to move national policy in the American political system.

And for young people who desire a lot of change, that's especially difficult.

Jason Hibbs: The Biden administration has pledged to make democracy a key part of the US foreign policy.

But it sounds like we have a lot of work to do here at home as well.

How optimistic are you about the future?

Jake Grumbach: I think that's a great way of putting it.

So a mixed bag here, so some cautious optimism?

I think so.

We see a lot of threats on the horizon in American democracy.

I don't want to mince words.

It's at the brink more than it has been certainly in my lifetime.

It's we're not at the same level of sort of low Democratic performance as we were during the Jim Crow period, for example.

But over the past sort of 30, 40 years, this is the sort of the most precarious position it's been in.

At the same time, that's generated a tremendous amount of new interest and invigorated energy around protecting democracy.

And for again, for the first time in my lifetime, I see that people talk about democracy, not just sort of as a tool, but as an end to itself, that democracy is a political goal.

It's not just a means to get whatever particular economic or social policy you want, but it's actually something that individual voters actually care about.

And that is a very hopeful sign for the future.

And I believe there can be a huge amount of democratic expansion and growth in the coming decade if people pay attention and work hard on behalf of their communities.

Jason Hibbs: So, yeah, that kind of segues into my probably the last question here are people who are watching the.

And they're bothered by this.

What should they do?

Jake Grumbach: Right.

So one important thing to remember is, again, the states control the levers of democracy.

And one important thing about the states is that there are fewer voters for state legislative elections that people pay attention, much less there's less media coverage of state legislative primaries and elections and state government than there is on.

We all know what Biden versus Trump was.

We don't know as much about what our state legislators are doing, that the states are an important place to look, and it's where votes matter more.

And your elect, your dollars, if you if you donate money to campaigns, they travel farther at lower levels.

So pay attention to the states, pay attention to what your state legislature is doing, hold them accountable and get active in those state level elections.

Jason Hibbs: OK, well, Dr Jake Grumbach, professor, researcher at the University of Washington, thank you so muc for speaking with us today.

And thank you for watching BackStory.

That's all the time we have.

We'll see you next time.

Announcer: BackStory is made possible in part by KeyBank.

With additional support from the League of Women Voters and by viewers like you.

Thank you.

(Music)