Written by Michael Stewart.

Under the directive of Executive Order 14019, President Joe Biden has put into motion a strategy that, according to the Oversight Project, could significantly alter the playing field for the upcoming elections. Issued early in his presidency, the order was ostensibly designed to improve voter accessibility, particularly for minority groups who, the order claims, face disproportionate challenges in the voting process. According to the preamble of the order, these groups are particularly encumbered by voter identification laws and restricted opportunities for mail-in voting.

Mike Howell, executive director of the Oversight Project, a watchdog group under the Heritage Foundation, has labeled the order as a form of “election interference.” Howell asserts that the Biden administration’s move is a calculated effort to mobilize historically Democratic voters under the guise of correcting racial discriminations in voting access. He pointed out that the last election’s critical votes in swing states were decided by a margin narrow enough that even a slight uptick in voter turnout could tip the scales in future elections.

The Oversight Project accuses the administration of using federal resources to facilitate voter registration and mail-in voting initiatives through various agencies. This involves not just passive encouragement but active participation in the electoral process, which some argue oversteps traditional boundaries separating government policy and electoral campaigning.

Strategic Mobilization and Partisan Concerns

The specifics of how federal agencies are directed to engage with the public under EO 14014 have raised eyebrows. Agencies are reportedly tasked with using their resources and connections to actively promote voter registration and mail-in ballot applications, especially targeting demographics that are statistically more likely to support Democratic candidates. This strategic alignment has intensified suspicions of partisanship, particularly given the historical voting patterns among the groups targeted by the order.

Furthering the controversy, the Oversight Project claims that federal agencies are collaborating with “approved” non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and state officials to execute these directives, which predominantly support the Democratic agenda. This collaboration has been described as a “whole of government approach” to secure reelection prospects, partnering with organizations that have openly supported leftist policies.

The nature of these partnerships and the specific roles these NGOs play in the electoral process have not been transparent, according to critics. This lack of openness, coupled with the administration’s reluctance to release detailed information about these activities, has fueled ongoing debates about the legitimacy and fairness of such government-led initiatives in the electoral context.

Legal and Ethical Implications

The implications of Executive Order 14019 extend beyond partisan politics; they touch on fundamental questions about the role of federal governance in elections—a sphere traditionally reserved for state control. Critics argue that the order blurs the lines between enhancing voter access and manipulating electoral outcomes, potentially infringing on the constitutional prerogatives of states to manage their own electoral affairs.

Legal challenges and pushbacks are already forming, as various states consider measures to counteract what they perceive as overreach. The Oversight Project suggests that states have legal grounds to challenge the application of EO 14019, particularly in how presidential elections are governed. They propose that states could enact laws that specifically govern presidential elections to safeguard them from perceived partisan influences of federal actions.

The debate over EO 14019 illustrates the ongoing struggle between ensuring accessible voting for all Americans and maintaining the integrity of electoral processes. As the political landscape continues to evolve, the actions taken now could have lasting impacts on how elections are conducted and perceived in terms of fairness and legality.

Our Take

The administration’s approach under Executive Order 14019 raises serious concerns about the sanctity of the electoral process in the United States. While the aim to increase voter turnout and make voting more accessible is commendable, the methods and the apparent partisan slant risk undermining the very foundation of democratic participation. It is crucial for the balance of power and the integrity of elections that any action taken at the federal level remains within legal bounds and maintains a clear distinction from electoral campaigning. As this situation unfolds, vigilance and transparency from all parties involved will be essential to preserve both the effectiveness and the perception of fairness in American elections.