An Alarming Trend: Election Security in Maricopa County

Significance and Context

Since the 2020 presidential election, Maricopa County, Arizona, has become the centerpiece in the national debate over the integrity and security of elections. As the second-largest voting jurisdiction in the United States, it has the kind of experience that speaks to the national discord over democracy, disinformation, and trust in the electoral process. If nothing else, recent events have been a reminder of the old adage that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Once a public trust issue has been raised, the electoral process almost inevitably becomes the focus of attention in calls for reforms and, sometimes, in the suit of those unpleased with the process’s outcome.

Article’s Argument

This article argues that Maricopa County’s increased security is not just a reaction to past problems but is creating an all-too-normal election environment based on fear and distrust. We will show how this is a dangerous path to follow—a path that, in the long run, threatens to make convincing anyone of the integrity of an election almost impossible. And we’ll talk about what seems to be causing this shift, the shift’s immediate societal effects, and what it might mean for our collective future as something resembling a democracy.

The Importance of This Subject

Election security in Maricopa County matters because it affects the nation. What happens in this county is seen as a test for the nation. Misinformation that elections are not fair has taken root in the public’s collective imagination, and this is now part of the American psyche.

A survey by the Brennan Center for Justice, taken in 2022, shows that 61% of Americans believe that the problem of misleading information about elections is a significant and serious problem. And when you talk to most public officials in this area—or even some private ones—they will tell you that the situation is kind of fluid.

Thorough Background Knowledge

The stormy post-2020 scene in Maricopa County is now marked by an unprecedented surge of protests, misinformation, and even threats to those administering the elections. After Biden’s win, a slice of the county’s residents, egged on by a certain amount of conspiracy mongering, demanded that the county’s election operations be “audited” (as if that word had any meaningful sense outside the context of the QAnon-basement-vault nonsense that hit the Internet back in 2020). But the protesting—well, some would call it “insurrection,” given the armed individuals confronting election officials—has required that the county erect a fence topped with razor wire, as if we were some sort of banana republic.

Main Points and Claims

The changes to election security in Maricopa County raise four interrelated issues—a new set of concerns about the erosion of trust in electoral processes. The story they tell isn’t a pretty one for democracy. The first concern is a new normal. MCTEC, which stands for the Maricopa County Tabulation and Election Center, has become so fortified with security that it looks more like a military installation than an election office. Drones and snipers? This isn’t some third-world country; it’s what American elections are becoming. And if society can increasingly accept the militarization of elections as a necessary evil, then we could be headed toward the perception that elections can’t be safe unless they’re heavily “policed.”

Another concern has to do with the toll taken on the people who work in those elections. The people who actually have to trust and be trusted take a hit psychologically, and they do it dangerously close to the line in a threatening environment. According to one report, about 30 percent of the people who work in elections considered quitting last year in part because they and their families had received threats.

Counterarguments and Refutations

Some people may contend that increased security is vital in the face of so many threats and that it is, in fact, a safeguard for the electoral process. While security is important, this argument overlooks the unfortunate reality that even the appearance of an election being well-secured can, by itself, diminish public trust in the election’s happening at all. Put another way, a public that sees and hears about elections being secured to the level of Fort Knox might wonder, “Are they really trying to protect the process, or are they trying to ensure that the process does not outlive its usefulness?”

What It Means for You and Me

The recent events in Maricopa County provide a sobering reminder of how precarious democratic institutions can be. Much of the county—including how its election system is engineered—has become something of a national laboratory for testing the unfounded fears and fantasies about large-scale election rigging that have circulated since 2020. Yet these fears have done real damage to Maricopa’s public vote-counting machine. And the ordinary newspaper reader is left wondering whether the same kinds of electoral security that some folks out in the desert appear to be demanding might not—in an inverted way—serve to undercut public trust and also public engagement.

Summary and Reiteration of Importance

Maricopa County’s situation is a microcosm of a larger democratic crisis the United States faces. Why? Because the way the crisis unfolds there—misinformation about the election emanating from the militarized office that paid for a controversial audit of the county’s 2020 election, and the toll that all this takes on people who have volunteered to run and monitor the county’s elections—gives us a clear look at just how brittle our democratic structures have become.

Last Thought

On the edge of the next electoral cycle, we face a question that is no longer simply about safety and security. It has become a question of democracy itself. Will we allow those who would instigate fear and mistrust to control our democratic processes? Or will we reassert our right to a safe and secure electoral process as a fundamental aspect of the narrative of democracy? What we decide will not only affect our next election but also set a tone and tenor that will make what we call “engaged citizenship” in this increasingly complex world—that is, the act of forsaking our right to dictate our own political processes and narrative in the first place.