Few principles are more essential to democracy than the promise of free and fair elections. These words represent more than just access to the ballot box—they embody the idea that every citizen’s voice counts equally, that elections are conducted transparently and securely, and that those who govern do so with the genuine consent of the people.
Yet across America, confidence in that promise is wavering. Questions about voter access, election security, gerrymandering, and even the safety of election officials have left many wondering whether our system still lives up to its ideals. What does it really mean for an election to be free and fair—and how close are we to achieving it?
In this article, we’ll examine the state of American elections through the voices of experts, public officials, and civic leaders featured on a range of insightful podcasts. You’ll hear from researchers at FairVote and the Brennan Center for Justice, state election officials working on the frontlines, and bipartisan leaders from initiatives like Braver Angels who are seeking solutions. Together, they reveal both the strengths and the cracks in our democratic infrastructure—from voter challenges and gerrymandering to the threats faced by those who administer our elections.
Their stories paint a nuanced picture of where our democracy stands today—and offer a glimpse of what it will take to protect the right that makes all others possible: the right to vote in free and fair elections.
Subscribe to receive a biweekly collection of the hottest podcast episodes from the network, upcoming special events, expert features, and news from your favorite shows.
Subscribe to our NewsletterDeb Otis, Director of Research and Policy at FairVote, a nonpartisan organization advocating for better elections for all, explains a common sentiment among many Americans: our elections don’t feel free or fair.
Deb Otis:
“Voters overwhelmingly feel like politicians don’t care what they think. They feel unrepresented, or that their vote doesn’t matter. Our whole system is supposed to be about representing the people and the consent of the governed—and yet here we are, with folks saying, ‘The system is not working for me.’”
Listen to the full episode on The Politics Guys: FairVote and Reforming Voting
The fact that citizens feel this way is deeply concerning—free and fair elections are directly linked to the health of our democracy. Cofounders Norman Eisen, Joanna Lydgate, and Christine Todd Whitman of the States United Democracy Center, along with Ben Adida, Executive Director of VotingWorks, share how a citizen’s right to vote underlies our entire democratic process.
Christine Todd Whitman:
“There’s only one definition of democracy: it’s our ability to elect our leaders. That’s the most important and valuable thing we have from our Constitution, frankly. So when people undermine democracy, they’re undermining that ability—they’re undermining people’s confidence in the vote.”
Joanna Lydgate:
“Democracy is We the People, right? It’s the most basic principle of this country. And as we see efforts to systematically undermine that, they take many forms: voter suppression, challenging election results, passing bills that change how elections are run, or people running for office to oversee elections while questioning the system over and over again—spreading lies, conspiracy theories, and misinformation. All of that is anti-democracy.
And something people don’t always appreciate is that no matter what issue you care most about—whether it’s climate, education, abortion, or the economy—it all comes down to free and fair elections.”
Norm Eisen:
“It’s the legitimating idea of America—one we pioneered, and one that’s admired around the world. Free, fair, and secure elections are the bridge between the will of the American people and the legitimacy of what our elected representatives and our government do. So if you attack that connector and disrupt the peaceful transition of power, you’re really opposing the very idea of America.”
Listen to the full episode on Democracy Works: States united for democracy
Ben Adida:
“At the end of the day, if we’re going to have a democracy, it depends on everybody knowing—and feeling—that their voice was heard. They need to know that the choice they expressed made it into the tally.
There are several things that go into that. First, everyone who’s eligible should have the chance to vote. Second—and this is less well understood—everyone should have a secret ballot. People should be able to vote their conscience without anyone else knowing how they voted. And finally, they should have confidence that their vote was counted.
Election integrity, at its core, is about every citizen knowing and feeling that they’re part of a functioning democracy.”
Listen to the full episode on Future Hindsight: Yes, Our Elections Are Secure: Ben Adida
To determine whether the United States truly has free and fair elections, it helps to look at the issue from several angles. First, we’ll explore the many layers of protection that safeguard our election systems. Then, we’ll examine where cracks in those protections may appear—or where the system itself may be set up unfairly.
The question of how secure our election system really is often arises. Ben Adida, Executive Director of VotingWorks, a nonprofit on a mission to make election technology everyone can trust through transparency, simplicity, and demonstrable security, explains the multiple layers of protection our election system employs.
Ben Adida:
“The fundamental principle of security in practice is that there isn’t a single layer of defense that’s perfect. Every defense you build is imperfect. So you build layers, with the goal being that for an attacker to penetrate all of them, it would take a long time, be very hard and expensive, and they’d probably get caught.
The analogy I give people my age is the vault in Die Hard—at the end, where they have to break through seven doors to get to the bank bonds. That’s how security works in practice: you build those layers of defense. One has to be broken one way, another a different way.
So, what are the layers of defense in a voting system? The first one is the paper ballot. If you wanted to hack an election so that audits or recounts wouldn’t catch it, you’d have to somehow stuff or alter paper ballots in every precinct and county you were attacking. That’s already pretty difficult to do. The paper ballot itself is a massive layer of defense.
Next, you’d have to install malicious software on the tabulators so they’d count votes differently. But those machines are not connected to the internet. That’s another important layer of defense. It’s not perfect, but it significantly reduces what we call the attack surface. If a machine is online, anyone on the internet could try to attack it. If it’s offline, you’d have to show up in person—it’s an entirely different scenario.
Audits are another layer of defense, as is ballot accounting. Election administrators know exactly how many ballots they print, how many they distribute, and how many remain. At the end of the election, they count the remaining ballots, and those numbers must add up—the printed, distributed, and remaining ballots all need to match.
So, to successfully attack an election, you’d have to corrupt all those layers. That’s what makes our system resilient.”
Listen to the full episode on Future Hindsight: Yes, Our Elections Are Secure: Ben Adida
Host Simone Leeper of Democracy Decoded highlights the people who dedicate immense effort to ensuring elections remain secure and that every vote counts. She spoke with Lorena S. Portillo, Clark County Registrar of Voters, who brings more than 25 years of experience in elections, and Jonathan Diaz, Director of Voting, Advocacy, and Partnerships at the Campaign Legal Center.
Simone Leeper: “All elections—even federal ones—are organized by election officials at the local or state level, which means they’re run by the people in your community.”
Lorena S. Portillo: “I appreciate that everyone works together to ensure the election process is run with integrity. We are election officials, we are government employees, but above all, we are public servants. We’re here for the people.”
Leeper: “It’s the months of planning and preparation by these public servants that ensure each election runs as smoothly and efficiently as possible. States administer elections locally, which helps keep them safe and secure.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, having dispersed responsibilities in election administration makes it extremely difficult—if not impossible—to manipulate the system. This localized approach also allows each county to meet the specific needs of its voters. What works in a densely populated city like Los Angeles might not work in a rural Minnesota county.
Individual jurisdictions can innovate and better serve their communities. For example, Lorena’s jurisdiction includes multiple departments that cover the various aspects of running an election in an area the size of Clark County.”
Portillo: “We have administration, mail ballots, registration, training and recruitment, IT, and warehouse departments.”
Leeper: “To staff these departments, election officials hire anywhere from a few hundred to a few thousand employees, volunteers, and poll workers before an election.”
Jonathan Diaz: “Everyday Americans keep our elections fair, and they take that responsibility seriously. These are dedicated friends, neighbors, and coworkers who help keep American democracy safe and secure in their own communities.”
Diaz: “One of the most disheartening trends of the last few years has been the sharp increase in harassment and threats of violence against election officials across the country. That really took off in 2020 and has continued through the 2022 elections and even in so-called off-cycle years like 2023. That’s a huge problem for democracy.”
Leeper: “According to the political reform group Issue One, nearly three in four election officials have reported an increase in threats in recent years—and that includes Lorena.”
Portillo: “We definitely experience what many election officials experience—the threats, the name-calling, the bad emails. But we work closely with law enforcement to ensure we’re prepared for every election. We want our team to feel comfortable, and we want voters to feel comfortable coming to see us.”
Listen to the full episode on Democracy Decoded: Your Community, Your Election
One of the growing concerns surrounding election integrity in recent years has been the safety and treatment of election officials themselves. In some cases, their professionalism and motives have been publicly questioned; in others, they have faced direct threats and harassment simply for doing their jobs. New Mexico Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver explains how this climate of suspicion has escalated into violence and intimidation against election workers.
Maggie Toulouse Oliver:
“What’s different now is that the folks unhappy with the outcome of the 2020 presidential election have decided to completely demonize election officials across the country.
They’ve bought into what we call the Big Lie—this myth that somehow over 3,000 election jurisdictions across the country engaged in a massive conspiracy to defraud voters. And so, when you’re trying to do your job—which is already incredibly challenging—you’re balancing access and security, implementing countless policies, and managing eight million moving parts, all while under an increasingly hostile microscope.
Our motives are constantly questioned. We’re told we’re corrupt, that we’re trying to defraud people of their right to vote and have their chosen candidate elected. Working in that environment is extremely difficult.
As you know, Debbie, many of my colleagues and I were threatened with violence for doing our jobs in 2020 and beyond. While that’s quieted down a bit, we’re all looking ahead to next year wondering, What’s going to happen? We know there will be more threats, more challenges. It’s something we’re constantly preparing for.”
Listen to the full episode on An Honorable Profession: Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver Leads in a Time of Political Turmoil
Daniel Weiner, Director of the Brennan Center’s Elections and Government Program, argues that if we want to preserve free and fair elections, we must better fund and protect the officials who make them possible.
Daniel Weiner:
“I think the overwhelming majority of the election officials running our elections are dedicated public servants—people deeply faithful to the rule of law.
To anyone who’s worried right now, I’d say this: we absolutely need to have their backs. We must ensure they have the tools to do their jobs effectively. One concern, frankly, is the withdrawal of federal support for election security—the gutting of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, or CISA, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security. The Trump administration slashed its budget and pulled it back from much of the work it was doing to support election officials. That’s very worrisome.
People will need to step into the gap to help them do their jobs—and to stand by them if they come under political or legal attack for doing those jobs. If we do that, I believe we’ll continue to have free, fair, and secure elections.”
Listen to the full episode on Talkin‘ Politics & Religion Without Killin‘ Each Other: Guardrails of Democracy: Daniel Weiner of the Brennan Center on Authoritarianism, Election Integrity, and Legal Guardrails
Another major challenge to free and fair elections arises when changes in election policies inadvertently disenfranchise millions of Americans. The voting gap between white and minority voters continues to grow, and even well-intentioned reforms can deepen inequities. Sean Morales-Doyle, Director of the Voting Rights and Elections Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, explains how shifts in election rules can disproportionately impact certain groups.
Sean Morales-Doyle:
“As long as we make it harder for everyone, then everyone’s got to jump through the same hoops—that’s not the way it works. When you add extra hoops, when you put obstacles in front of the ballot box, those obstacles aren’t felt equally by everybody.
If you limit voting to certain hours on certain days—say, only in person on Election Day—then someone like me, who’s free to leave work in the middle of the day to cast a ballot; people privileged with that flexibility; people who are able-bodied and can easily reach the polls; people who can navigate a complicated mail-voting process; or those who can afford to get a new passport or an updated birth certificate—those folks will be able to vote.
But there are many people who don’t fall into those categories. There are people who can’t take time away from work or child care to cast a ballot. There are people who physically can’t get to the polling place. There are people who can’t afford the money or time it takes to track down official documents.
There are infinite ways changes to voting rules can affect one group more than another—and we’ve seen it play out for 150 years. This isn’t a secret or new information. When we had literacy tests, poll taxes, or grandfather clauses, those burdens fell differently on different groups of people. Some of today’s rules are intended to do the same thing. But even when they’re not intentionally discriminatory, decades of evidence show that when you put obstacles in front of the ballot box, the effects are never equal.
We should all want a democracy that truly reflects the will of the people—and when I say the people, I mean all of the people. We should want a democracy where everyone is allowed to participate so that the outcomes genuinely reflect what the people want. When we lock certain groups out of that conversation, we harm everyone.
Sometimes, when we talk about voting rights and democracy, we get lost in the details of specific rules or their effects. It’s important to step back and ask: What are we trying to get out of democracy? What’s the democracy we want? What’s the democracy we deserve?
It’s not just about defending the democracy we already have—it’s about envisioning what democracy could be. It’s about imagining a world where everybody participates, every vote matters, and democracy truly represents and responds to the will of the people.”
Listen to the full episode on The Context: The US Doesn’t Have Fair Elections. What Can We Do?
Another practice that calls into question the fairness of elections is the drawing of voting districts — a process that can lead to gerrymandering. Larry Mayes, Senior Vice President for Government and Community Relations at Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Boston, explains the basic problem, and Deb Otis of FairVote expands on how it actually plays out.
Larry Mayes:
“Gerrymandering is when something is done that’s unfair to the voter — when legislators carve up a district in a way that benefits themselves or their party.
And let’s be clear, because most times when people think or hear about gerrymandering — depending on one’s steady diet of media — it can seem like it happens predominantly on the right, from the ‘reds.’
That’s not true. Gerrymandering happens on both sides — red and blue alike.”
Listen to the full episode on How Do We Fix It?: Braver Angels Trustworthy Elections Report: Larry Mayes and Walt McKee
Deb Otis:
“When we do redistricting, it becomes such a fraught process because changing how you draw a line just a little bit can completely shift the balance of power. I think we’ve all seen those maps and simulations where, in one state, the party in charge of redistricting can give themselves anywhere between 30% and 90% of the seats.
This all started, for example, when Texas Republicans realized they might be able to draw maps to gain five more seats. Once one side does that, the other side wants to as well. The incentives are really clear — and the courts have said, ‘Partisan gerrymandering is fine, go for it.’ So of course, each side keeps doing it.
If we could move away from single-member districts and toward multi-winner districts, we could lessen the impact of gerrymandering. When you’re drawing larger districts and electing people through proportional representation, it doesn’t matter as much how the lines are drawn.
Studies show that with multi-member districts, as long as you’re electing people proportionally, almost any map will get you pretty close to fair representation.”
Listen to the full episode on The Politics Guys: FairVote and Reforming Voting
Even after ballots are cast, votes can still face obstacles to being counted. One growing concern is the rise of voter challenges—formal objections to the eligibility of registered voters. Kim Allen, Co-founder of Power the Vote, explains why this practice threatens both voters and election administrators.
Kim Allen:
“Voter challenges are really concerning for a couple of reasons.
First, they create an enormous burden for election administrators, who already have a lot of work to do. Back in 2022, Republicans challenged the eligibility of about 100,000 voters in just five metro Atlanta counties. Those kinds of challenges really gum up the works for elections offices and boards, because they have to determine whether each of those voters is actually eligible to vote.
In Forsyth County—a far north metro Atlanta county—about 20% of the voters on the rolls have been subjected to a voter challenge. That’s extraordinary and gives you a sense of the scale and scope of what these counties are dealing with.
What we’re seeing is election boards struggling to apply both Georgia law and federal law, and that became even more difficult when Governor Kemp signed a bill making it even easier, or at least purporting to make it easier, to challenge voter eligibility.
This is troubling because if a voter is challenged, they could be removed from the rolls or placed into a challenged status without being removed. When those voters check their registration online, they might wrongly assume they’re no longer eligible to vote simply because their status is marked as challenged.
So we’re concerned about both the administrative burden on election officials and the impact on voters themselves. Even being notified that you’ve been challenged can be intimidating and may discourage people from showing up to vote.”
Listen to the full episode on Freedom over Facism: Will Your Vote Count? Kim Allen, Co-founder Power the Vote GA
Voter challenges aren’t the only threat that arises after Election Day. Entire elections can be called into question during the certification process, when officials formally validate results. Kim Allen describes how recent events in Georgia have raised alarms about the integrity of this process.
Kim Allen:
“In November 2023, we saw three counties where Republican board members refused to certify election results. This was the first time that had happened since 1899—a startling development. These were all metro Atlanta counties.
The Democratic Party of Georgia sent a legal letter to those Republican board members, highlighting a few important points. First, under Georgia law, county board members have a non-discretionary, mandatory legal duty to certify election results. Second, if they refuse, Georgia law includes provisions for criminal penalties for failing to perform an election-related duty. The letter underscored both the potential for legal action and the possibility of criminal charges.
Republican board members took notice, and there was significant public alarm about the letter. Still, we saw more counties—during the March 2024 presidential primary—vote against certifying election results, including in Fulton and Gwinnett counties. The Democratic Party of Georgia sent similar letters to those officials, again reminding them of their mandatory duty to certify results.
In response, Republicans have now taken control of the State Election Board in Georgia, creating a radical three-member MAGA majority. Over the summer, Donald Trump publicly praised these three members for helping to ‘secure his victory’ in Georgia. So there’s no subtlety here—it’s clear what’s happening and who’s behind it.
Public reporting has also shown that Cleta Mitchell’s Election Integrity Network is supporting this move to change the rules around certification. The State Election Board has passed new rules that cast doubt on whether Republican members will certify future results.
One rule introduces a ‘reasonable inquiry’ standard, saying board members should make such an inquiry before certification. Another allows them access to any and all documentation related to elections—essentially any piece of paper created during the process. They can review all of that when deciding whether to certify.
Based on these rules and the events leading up to them, the goal seems clear: to give county Republican board members a pretext—an excuse—to refuse to certify election results.”
Listen to the full episode on Freedom over Facism: Will Your Vote Count? Kim Allen, Co-founder Power the Vote GA
So, what can be done to move toward freer and fairer elections? Larry Mayes and Walt McKee—the Blue and Red Co-Chairs of the Trustworthy Elections Leadership Team for the Braver Angels Trustworthy Elections Initiative—share key recommendations from their findings. Over the course of 26 workshops with nearly 200 evenly balanced Red and Blue participants, they identified an impressive 727 unanimous points of agreement.
Richard Davies: “We’ve already discussed one recommendation—voter ID—which probably wasn’t easy to reach consensus on. Let’s go to a second one: fair and equal access to voting. Your report says our election process should strive to remove barriers so that every citizen has an equal and reasonable opportunity to cast a vote. Talk about that.”
Larry Mayes: “Democracy is based on voting—and I would say, on free elections. We don’t do it by gunpoint or by the sword. So we want to make voting as easy as possible, but also fair. That’s an important word. You do all you can to eliminate any kind of shenanigans or cheating. We want people to be able to vote freely, without interference—but to do it the right way.”
Richard Davies: “Walt, did Reds and Blues both recognize that some people face real barriers when it comes to casting a vote?”
Walt McKee: “Yes. Barriers like the ones raised in debates over voter ID, for instance. We recognized that we weren’t suggesting every state must implement a driver’s license-style photo ID. We said each state should come up with a process that suits its own circumstances. We also focused on the integrity of the vote—wanting ballots to be handled like police evidence, with a chain of custody, and with modern accountability measures in place.”
Larry Mayes: “Transparency is the currency. That was key. Another recommendation for fairness was to establish a federal Election Day—a national holiday—to make it easier for people to vote. We wanted to address the issue of long lines, which can be a major barrier. So, a federal holiday, more polling places, and easier access for everyone—no matter where they live—are all ways to make the process more equitable.”
Walt McKee: “We also emphasized that if parties or organizations want to provide poll watchers, those poll watchers must receive proper training. At the same time, we rely heavily on volunteers and temporary workers who step up every few years to run polling stations. When those people face threats or assaults, it’s unacceptable. We called for increased penalties for anyone who intimidates or attacks election workers—not only to protect them, but to encourage others to continue doing this invaluable public service. That ties directly into our recommendation for transparency and accountability: every citizen should be able to understand the election process.”
Listen to the full episode on How Do We Fix It?: Braver Angels Trustworthy Elections Report: Larry Mayes and Walt McKee
Free and fair elections are the heartbeat of democracy. They ensure that power flows from the people to their representatives, grounded in trust, transparency, and equal participation. As the experts and officials in this article have shown, safeguarding that process requires constant attention—from securing election systems and supporting election workers, to reforming district maps, protecting voter access, and maintaining confidence in election certification.
The challenges are real: misinformation, partisan manipulation, and public distrust all threaten the stability of our electoral foundation. Yet, the solutions are within reach. Across party lines, leaders and citizens alike are finding common ground in strengthening election integrity and expanding participation.
The right to vote is not only a privilege—it is the mechanism through which all other rights are defended. Protecting the fairness and freedom of our elections means protecting the very essence of self-government. Democracy depends on it.
Subscribe to receive a biweekly collection of the hottest podcast episodes from the network, upcoming special events, expert features, and news from your favorite shows.
Subscribe to our Newsletter
The annual U.S. Media Literacy Week just wrapped up last week!
What does it really mean to have free and fair elections—and how close is America to achieving them? Discover how experts, officials, and reformers are strengthening voter access, election security, and public trust in democracy.
Our member shows brought home the gold and silver medals.
Engaging in civil discourse. Inspiring civic engagement. Exploring the future of our democracy.
Join our community and never miss your favorite episodes from the Democracy Group.
Subscribe to our Newsletter