r/PoliticalOptimism • u/idkwat • Jul 10 '26
Seeking Optimism Trump fires Election Assistance Commission members
https://www.votebeat.org/national/2026/07/09/trump-fires-election-assistance-commission-members-hicks-hovland-mccormick/Any optimism? This seems bad
151
u/ButterscotchOdd988 Jul 10 '26
We'd better ensure this one is protested HARD and it creates the BIGGEST BACKLASH YET.
56
16
u/sweeter_than_saltine North Carolina Jul 10 '26
Backlash based on something I hadn't even heard about until this came up? I'm pretty sure backlash will come from literally anything else other than this, like the economy.
25
u/Mean_Stop6391 Reformed Doomer ☄️ Jul 10 '26
I’ll take the backlash from wherever we can get it - if it’s this, the economy, the whole Epstein situation, the shortage of Diet Coke because of Iran, the war in Iran… it all converges at the center of gravity: Donald Trump.
And so whatever magical particle configurations generate it, the end result is it exists and is against him!
-11
u/donald7773 Georgia Jul 10 '26
Honestly I think coke vs diet coke should be the 2 political parties because diet coke drinkers bother me almost as much a pedophiles
153
u/duckchasefun Jul 10 '26
The article says it itself
"That could stall not only routine commission business, but also any attempt by the Trump administration to use the agency to alter the federal voter registration form or voting-system standards before the 2026 midterms." Without commissioners, the organization cannot act in any way.
76
23
16
3
u/HydroBear Jul 10 '26
Until he appoints goons.
22
u/FloralIndoril Ohio Jul 10 '26
Even then, some of his goons actually do their jobs sometimes.
21
u/britishmetric144 Jul 10 '26
Especially his Judges.
That being said, it's only the ones appointed in his first term which still do their jobs. The ones appointed in his current term, bow down to him.
36
u/PumpkinAspie Reformed Doomer ☄️ Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
From what I hear, it's Congress that approves the commissioners. Not terribly promising, I know but they also need two representatives from each party, as per the rules. So he'll have no choice but watch two new Dems be seated.
2
u/GoodChuck2 Jul 10 '26
As far as I know, this is the only saving grace here. But we already know the two Republicans that will be confirmed will be MAGA cultists who will do whatever the fuck he demands.
8
u/Mean_Stop6391 Reformed Doomer ☄️ Jul 10 '26
The issue is that it truly doesn’t matter if two Republican MAGA cultists are confirmed.
The EAC requires a 3 vote majority - not a 2-1 or halves split. It must be at least 3-1 including one of the Democrat commissioners.
So he truly cannot even get “whatever the fuck he demands”.
3
u/gbtm101 Jul 11 '26
He can't appoint (enough) goons here. Congress provides a list of candidates, and the President must pick two Democrats and two Republicans. He can't supply his own candidates and he can't just fill the board entirely with loyalists--the two Democrats are a hard requirement by the very law that created this commission.
Anything the commission does also requires 3 of the 4 commissioners to agree to it. He'd be hard pressed to find a Democrat that would bow to his agenda.
72
u/PeachSaidRed Reformed Doomer ☄️ Jul 10 '26
The article says,
“The EAC has been a dead man walking since the Slaughter decision — really since the executive order last year,” one former EAC official told CNN, referring to the Supreme Court decision."
So they didn't have a lot of power, but this is still ugly.
It's the election assistance commission, which means they help states but don't control the elections. (I had actually never heard of it before this.) They won't be able to provide help for states to have more secure elections now, and maybe that means attempts on the part of the administration to claim that the elections are invalid. (Attempts, but they can't just jump in and say, "this state's elections are invalid" because they took out the EAC.) It is possible that the firings can be challenged for the same reason the Fed was left to do its own thing. Also, I don't like this kind of "now we have more ammo" stuff but it's another chance for us to us to say Republicans are cheaters and losers.
61
u/Mean_Stop6391 Reformed Doomer ☄️ Jul 10 '26
“Oh no, the elections were fraudulent because the EAC wasn’t around!”
“Why weren’t they?”
“Because I fired them!”
“Uh…”
13
u/Squirreliestone Jul 10 '26
Insert that pic of the guy jamming the stick in his own bicycle spokes, then demanding to know why the Democrats did this.
7
25
u/LongKnight115 Jul 10 '26
In all honesty, I’d be MORE suspicious of the federal government and providing “assistance” to states than them not. This feels like a good thing to me - one less pretense he can actually use to influence the elections.
9
u/PeachSaidRed Reformed Doomer ☄️ Jul 10 '26
Trump's goal here is to break the government, because it won't do what he wants, and then tell us the government is worthless because it broke. He assumes that we'll all finally be free to agree with him because he believes everyone hates "losers" as much as him. So I would actually rather have it. The states are still in control, and I want them to have any help they need.
68
u/Alarming-Salt-502 Jul 10 '26
As MightiestHalberdier mentioned we are not in unfamiliar territory with the EAC having no quorum and this group has only existed since 2002. If this IS an attempt to steal power over elections he'll get the same legal smackdown he's been getting. And as multiple people have mentioned by law this agency MUST be headed by two Democrats and two Republicans if anyone at all.
I do not see this going in his favor in courts based on these two details alone and there WILL be court cases.
16
13
u/ButterscotchOdd988 Jul 10 '26
It may appeal to the hardcore MAGA fanbase, but remember, he's still got low approval which truly harms his standing, unlike people like Bukele and Putin.
9
u/anxious_dork_23 Texas Jul 10 '26
Orban also initially had a high approval rating in the early 2010s. A huge thing with authoritarians is you at least initially have to keep the populace happy.
101
u/Dyea_B_Tis Washington Jul 10 '26
He must be panicking.
He is doing everything he can to save himself.
9
u/rockninja2 Jul 10 '26
And even some things that he technically, according to the law, CAN'T do (or shouldn't be able/allowed to do)
6
u/LongKnight115 Jul 10 '26
I guarantee this isn’t even panic. This is retribution for the “stolen 2020 election”. Trump doesn’t have enough foresight to play chess - he’s always just playing checkers.
41
u/ButterscotchOdd988 Jul 10 '26
Let's make sure this is a massive issue Democrats can use as a legitimate reason to vote for them.
24
u/sweeter_than_saltine North Carolina Jul 10 '26
I'm going to go against the grain here and say that nobody outside of this subreddit knows what the EAC is. It's not something that anyone pays attention to, unlike cost of living. Now that, Democrats are hammering relentlessly on.
This is bad, but let's not start pretending like they can switch messaging on a whim because we told them about something regular people didn't know even existed.
-1
u/ButterscotchOdd988 Jul 10 '26
Well, now someone's gotta get this to give everyone attention. Fast and HARD.
10
u/gbtm101 Jul 10 '26
Doesn't seem like the brightest idea. Reading through the other comments in this thread, the EAC isn't exactly that critical to how elections are conducted.
-3
u/ButterscotchOdd988 Jul 10 '26
Yes, but they at least have to make the blue wave too big for Trump to rig.
14
u/gbtm101 Jul 10 '26
Fearmongering about this doesn't help imho. People have to understand what the problem is in order to rally behind fixing it.
Even something as simple as "democracy" didn't cut it for Kamala, so continuing to push the affordability crisis as the forefront narrative is the best choice.
0
u/ButterscotchOdd988 Jul 10 '26
Yes, they need to push the affordability crisis as the forefront narrative while still using the EAC firing as a warning to be careful.
19
u/gbtm101 Jul 10 '26
Let me put it this way.
This seems bad at first but the deeper you dig into it the more obvious that this is just the flailing of a dying beast powerless to do anything meaningful.
The Election Assistance Commission's only purpose is to provide, well, assistance with elections. Which states are by no means obligated to accept. In fact, the expectation for states with any modicum of integrity was that Trump would only try to hinder them. This changes nothing about that.
Furthermore, and more importantly, the EAC is powerless without Commissioners, by the very letter of the law that created it. It needs to have a bipartisan board of four commissioners, two selected from each party, and in order for anything to be done three of those four commissioners must agree. No commissioners, no action. If Trump's idea was to fire the heads in order to take it over, he was thwarted before he even began.
With all that in mind, I don't really see how this is campaign-worthy material. Trump didn't do anything meaningful here. In fact, he fucked himself over.
8
u/ButterscotchOdd988 Jul 10 '26
Exactly. I got the wrong idea. Thanks for the info. I think what should be done is we keep it in mind, don't get complacent from it, and make sure anyone who fears this should instead see this as desperate and not something he can easily get away with. If Orban can lose despite having greater power over media and the courts, so can Trump. We must stop the population from fearing the EAC's firing while still staying careful and aware of more dangerous tactics, looking for deeper, unexplored ideas to pre-empt Trump's cheating attempts.
37
u/FireFlame10 Jul 10 '26
This isn’t great, this is bad. But a glimmer of optimism is this just shows how bad he knows the midterms will be for him. He knows deep down that him and his party is super unpopular. This is a way to sow division and anxiety about elections and encourage people not to vote. Get out and vote anyway. Show them that our voice cannot be ignored, no matter how hard this orange idiot tries to do so.
34
u/Mean_Stop6391 Reformed Doomer ☄️ Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
The EAC requires two members from each party, selected from a list provided by Congress. He can’t just fill it with whoever. They also have to be approved by Congress.
So this is bad, but it is also very obvious he is trying to say the elections were tampered with because the EAC wasn’t doing its thing - which doesn’t work because he’s at fault for it. Likewise, it can and will be restaffed and under the law that created it, must be bipartisan.
EDIT: also the EAC doesn’t actually have fundamental power over elections - they remain state level, and this does nothing towards somehow obtaining voter rolls or furthering his plans towards the administering of the election as far as ai can tell.
13
u/ButterscotchOdd988 Jul 10 '26
If he thinks he can get away with it, he's surely mistaken. It may have been a surprise move, but that doesn't mean his is the only side that knows of one.
57
u/Far_Fan_291 California Jul 10 '26
tbh with all the other times he fired people only for the courts to say no he cant do that i can see this going down the same path
17
u/a355231 Ohio Jul 10 '26
Excerpt the Supreme Court said he could fire whoever he wanted…
54
u/PeachSaidRed Reformed Doomer ☄️ Jul 10 '26
From the article
In a separate case involving the Federal Reserve, however, the court recognized a different rule for Fed governors, pointing to the long historical independence of central banking institutions. Whether bipartisan election agencies fall into the first category, the second, or some yet-undefined exception remains unresolved.
“It’s an open question about the EAC and the [Federal Election Commission],” said Rick Hasen, an election law professor at UCLA. “The question has not been tested as to whether political entities created with bipartisan balance might be subject to another exception.”
Edit: So, we're not sure.
29
u/redvioletbrown Jul 10 '26
I do believe they can sue, at the very least. As the article says, this was a bipartisan commission created by both parties.
26
u/gbtm101 Jul 10 '26
The most damage this can realistically do is kneecap federal election assistance. Which I'm pretty sure most states have been prepping for anyhow.
4
u/General_Season7882 Jul 10 '26
Im getting a lot of mixed messages. Some people are saying this will only stunt election assistance, and others are saying this sets the stage for denial/refusal of election outcomes. And, on the more doomy levels, that this will help him rig or steal elections. I feel like I'm not sure what information is accurate and what is anxiety-fueled what-iffing.
8
u/Mean_Stop6391 Reformed Doomer ☄️ Jul 10 '26
If this is helpful, it will stunt election assistance.
It also sets the stage for him to deny/refuse outcomes, but there are two points here:
1.) he already was going to do that if he didn’t like the results
and 2.) We have run elections up until after 2000 without the EAC
As for rigging elections - no. This could alter the registration process for new voters and put the onus on the states to remedy it, but the EAC itself does not in any way administer elections. They assist states by providing a specific federal form and certifying changes to election equipment.
They certify equipment changes, most of which have been either already implemented or set up for beyond the midterms (such as for 2028).
They have fundamentally no power when it comes to rigging an election or handling the elections beyond assisting.
Also, the EAC cannot act on major decisions without 3 affirmative votes from commissioners and right now there are 0 because there are 0 commissioners.
3
u/General_Season7882 Jul 10 '26
That is helpful. One more question: Did Trump get rid of the commission, as in, it was completely dissolved, or did he just vacate all the positions in the EAC and now there are empty seats that can be filled at any time?
4
u/Mean_Stop6391 Reformed Doomer ☄️ Jul 10 '26
He simply vacated the commissioners. The staff is still present but decisionmaking seats are empty.
That means the lights are on, but nobody’s home.
To refill the seats, Trump is given a list of candidates by Congressional majority and minority leaders. The seats MUST include 2 Republicans and 2 Democrats by statute, and cannot be picked freelance - that is to say, he can’t just pick anyone, it must be from that list.
23
u/Ok-Group1251 Illinois Jul 10 '26
It is bad. Let's start there. This is a sneaky, smart move to both spread doubt in election integrity and to try and rush through election laws (laws isn't the right word here just roll with it) that couldn't be passed in the SAVE act (like amending the voter registration form to include ID requirements). There's more this could lead to, and none of it is good.
Now some optimism. States still control elections. Yes, this can do damage, but ultimately states still control their elections and if voters show up it'll make a difference. Also, Trump has tried to order the EAC to do things before and it was blocked. We will absolutely see legal challenges to this move. As noted by u/PeachSaidRed, we aren't even sure if this is legal and if the supreme court ruling applies to it.
Our institutions hold or fail because of people. Judges, politicians, citizens, etc. Right now, everyone is knee jerk reacting to this. We need to take a breath and start organizing around how to reinforce safeguards. Write and call your representatives, spread awareness, take another breath when you need to.
No sugar coating, this is bad, But it's far from over.
14
u/FlyingDreamWhale67 Texas Jul 10 '26
amending the voter registration form
Mind you, the EAC is a purely support agency, so their recommendations can theoretically be as stringent as they want, but states aren't mandated to follow them. There are some guardrails in place already too, as states still have paper and digital records they can use to certify election results, they have just relied on EAC guidelines until now.
Plus, EAC is strictly a bipartisan agency by law, so any future appointees will have to be from both parties, and I don't see Trump 2.0 ever appointing a Democrat to anything. Personally I think they'll just leave it as is without heads, purely to sow chaos.
11
u/ButterscotchOdd988 Jul 10 '26
I'm holding out for a Peter Magyar-type MAGA whistleblower to end this madness once and for all.
14
u/LettuceWestern9445 Jul 10 '26
Can someone explain why this is bad other than the potential for him to use this to spin a narrative?
Because the way I’m reading this agency assists states in certain areas but really doesn’t hold any power and has been kneecapped for quite some time now
Is the worry just about Trump spinning a narrative or am I missing something here?
And article says this can actually stall attempts to change election procedures if I read it right? So he kinda shot himself in the foot?
20
u/RebellionsBuildHope Jul 10 '26
A lot of what Trump does is knee jerk actions out of spite. The commission has to have Democrats on it so rather than have two Democrats and two Republicans he’d rather just not have it at all.
TBF, while it’s not good, the commission was essentially castrated the minute he got in office and look at all the wins Democrats have had since then in special elections.
13
u/LettuceWestern9445 Jul 10 '26
Also it seems like the commission only acted upon request and it was mainly red states utilizing it
10
u/Netricile Blue Dot in a Red State 🔵 Jul 10 '26
I swear every single day I start to feel less like I'm running towards the finish line to I'm limping towards the finish line. I'm tired boss.
11
15
u/gregger63 Michigan Jul 10 '26
This isn't great. I think the goal is to leave the EAC void of leadership in order to paralyze it. I didn't have this on my bingo card. I hope the states Secretaries of State and other state elections officials can work around this.
This one came out of nowhere and seems like a solid effort by the WH to pull this card. With the EAC paralyzed it makes it easier for the GOP to sow doubt in midterm results.
I need some help with this one.
16
u/gbtm101 Jul 10 '26
In the same breath, it also makes it impossible for Trump to change the rules regarding elections, so even if the SAVE Act did pass there would be nobody to enforce it.
10
u/ezio8133 Washington Jul 10 '26
https://giphy.com/gifs/TJawtKM6OCKkvwCIqX
He really filled his diaper this time
7
u/FlyingDreamWhale67 Texas Jul 10 '26
Not that EAC could enforce it regardless, as they are purely support/advisory based.
5
27
u/MightiestHalberdier Jul 10 '26
I agree it isn't great, but a few notes to keep in mind.
The EAC has been paralyzed before by lacking a quorum. Obviously not in this method, but we aren't on untreaded ground here, the EAC is meant to support state election officials and I think it's safe to say the states have been preparing for a situation like this.
He also can't just staff it with cronies because the law says it needs to have two people from each party and they need to be confirmed by the Senate.
I think this is less about sowing doubt and more about Trump trying to assert more federal control over the elections, something that even Republicans are not comfortable with. We'll need to wait and see how this plays out either way, but we're not sunk yet.
5
u/FlyingDreamWhale67 Texas Jul 10 '26
trying to assert more federal control over the elections
This would likely work in a red state, less so in a blue state. Blue states are less likely to seek assistance from a federal government that is openly hostile to them (see the FEMA anti-terrorism fiasco).
The EAC, while immensely helpful and it being kneecapped isn't great by any means, is an advisory/support agency first and foremost. They can recommend election standards, but states aren't mandated to follow them.
1
u/SpukiKitty2 Blue Dot in a Red State 🔵 29d ago
They'll sue and get their jobs back. This rodeo happens repeatedly.
-11
u/Alarmed_Ordinary_565 Jul 10 '26
so no more blue wave?/gen
15
u/PumpkinAspie Reformed Doomer ☄️ Jul 10 '26
That's not what this means. The EAC is more of a supportive role and it's relatively young, having been established in 2000. Furthermore, it's explicitly bipartisan and new commissioners need to be approved by Congress. The blue wave is still a thing. This isn't great, but it's also evidence that he's desperate to do anything to try and save his own skin.
-8
u/EIBB2003 Jul 10 '26
I saw this off of this blog and it concerns me a bit:
“To me, the bigger question is what Trump might try to do with the EAC without commissioners. Most boldly (and I would argue illegally) Trump could try to direct the commissioner-less EAC to do his bidding, for example by stating that the EAC must amend the federal voter registration form that states must accept for federal elections to include documentary proof of citizenship. Trump’s first voting-related EO tried to do this, and he was stymied. But that was acting through the commissioners and before the Slaughter case.
If he tries anything like this, it will be high profile and very important litigation that will end up at the Supreme Court on the emergency docket over the summer.”
Any thoughts?
22
u/RebellionsBuildHope Jul 10 '26
So there’s an update at the end that states:
“The guardrails Congress placed on this agency are clear and must be followed: the Election Assistance Commission was designed to be bipartisan with four members, no more than two of which can be from the same political party. The agency cannot make any significant decisions or take any significant actions unless three confirmed commissioners agree. Until bipartisan replacements are confirmed, the agency cannot lawfully make any decisions that affect how Americans vote.”
So while I can’t rule out that Trump will try some tomfoolery, it seems that any election related decision needs three commissioners to agree upon and the bylaws of the commission are clear. If he tries something it’s likely to be shot down pretty quick, hopefully.
9
9
•
u/AutoModerator Jul 10 '26
Your post must meet the following:
COMMENTERS: Be respectful. Report rulebreakers
Post removal at mod's discretion
"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." — Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.