The next is a transcript of an interview with CBS Information chief Washington correspondent Main Garrett and CBS Information election legislation contributor David Becker that aired Sunday, Sept. 18, 2022, on "Face the Nation."
MARGARET BRENNAN: We flip now to CBS Information chief Washington correspondent Main Garrett and CBS Information election legislation contributor, David Becker, who've a brand new guide out on the state of American democracy. It is referred to as "The Large Fact: Upholding Democracy within the Age of the Large Lie." Congratulations to you each.
MAJOR GARRETT: Thanks very a lot.
DAVID BECKER: Thanks.
MARGARET BRENNAN: , Main, I need to begin with you, as a result of in these simply actually the primary web page of the guide, you utilize the phrase, American Civil Warfare. You go on to write down that within the upcoming election in November and in 2024, belief itself goes to be examined. "Democracy not suffers from a scarcity of participatory vitality. It suffers from a scarcity of respect, allegiance, data, humanity, and, most of all, belief." How harmful is the second that we're in?
MAJOR GARRETT: It feels extra harmful, Margaret, than any I've encountered in protecting politics on the nationwide stage since 1990. David and I needed to write this guide, however we want we did not should. Stating what clearly occurred in 2020, it wasn't a fraudulent election, no crime was dedicated. That does not imply it's a must to be proud of the outcome, however one of many burdens of democracy is whenever you're sad with the outcome, your obligation is to win the subsequent election, not slander, baselessly, the election you pretty misplaced. And now we have a part of American politics now that desires to slander an election that was pretty misplaced, as a result of they're sad. And that unhappiness doesn't entitle you to tug down American democracy as a result of if, Margaret, we enter a section in American life the place both political occasion refuses to just accept a good and verified election just because it misplaced, then we'll dismantle democracy little by little earlier than our very eyes. And that is what I'm, what we're driving at once we discuss concerning the coming contours of not a bloody civil battle, however a procedural Civil Warfare the place we separate ourselves from one other and the Union, the USA itself, little by little turns into to break- begins to interrupt aside
MARGARET BRENNAN: And David simply so individuals know your background. I imply, you labored on the Justice Division for a while, you are an professional on- on voting rights and based the Heart for election innovation and analysis. Certainly one of our colleagues right here, Nicole Sganga, interviewed Kim Wyman. She is the senior election safety lead at part of Homeland Safety. She spent 30 years working in elections out within the state of Washington. And on this interview, she clearly is feeling that this menace is hitting dwelling. Take a pay attention.
Kim Wyman SOT: "A number of the- among the threats are actual. , we'll dangle you. I hope any individual places a bullet in your head, that type of factor. So it is unnerving. It is unnerving."
MARGARET BRENNAN: Homeland Safety official moved to tears by what she is speaking about. I imply, it is extraordinarily highly effective to me to listen to that. How widespread is that proper now?
DAVID BECKER: Yeah, sadly, it is quite common. I imply, individuals want to grasp Kim Wyman is somebody I've identified for a very long time. She's a former county election official. She is a former Secretary of State within the state of Washington, she is a Republican. And he or she, like so a lot of her colleagues- and she or he's seeing this as a result of she's working with them, are going through an onslaught of threats and harassment and abuse within the aftermath of the 2020 election that's utterly divorced from the fact of their success. The election professionals all around the nation, pink states, blue states, Republicans, Democrats by some means managed the very best turnout we have ever seen in American historical past in the midst of a worldwide pandemic. And the last word outcomes of this election were- withstood scrutiny from 60 courts across the nation. It was exceptional. And but they've discovered themselves subjected to so many dying threats, threats to their households, harassment and abuse over the course of the final practically two years and it is taken its toll.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Clearly. And also you talked to election officers from locations as divergent as Bucks County, Pennsylvania, simply two hours outdoors of New York Metropolis to elements of Georgia, Weber County, Utah. All of those persons are experiencing threats. What is the state of affairs they worry this November?
DAVID BECKER: Properly, I believe one of many issues they're seeing is that the fact, the transparency that they function beneath they- they- they embrace aggressive transparency, they need everybody to see every thing that they are doing. And but regardless of the information, regardless of that transparency, all that appears to matter is that some individuals consider that it's unimaginable for his or her candidate to lose. And if we get so divorced from that actuality, we get so divorced from our democratic rules that as Main mentioned, we begin being unwilling to just accept the potential for defeat, what would possibly then- what- what is likely to be attainable then? And we have already seen this, this is not hypothetical. We have seen this on January sixth, and we might see sooner or later dozens of little January 6ths, not centered on Washington, on one explicit date, however centered in many alternative locations on many alternative dates, just because there are people who're spreading the mislead their supporters that they could not presumably lose.
MAJOR GARRETT: Margaret, these are anxious occasions. COVID created an incredible quantity of tension on this nation, it additionally modified the best way some states voted. And that created a way of being dislodged slightly bit, we perceive that. And we, within the guide, say, 'look, in the event you're interested by how one thing was modified, here is the reply for why it did not materially have an effect on the result of the election.' However that anxiousness lingers, and that anxiousness might present itself in precincts throughout this nation, the place disagreements or simply fundamental low stage confusion all of a sudden develop into one thing a lot greater, a a lot bigger confrontation. After which all of a sudden, persons are trying in from throughout the nation questioning what's occurring in that voting, after which creates anxiousness about voting in their very own a part of the nation, which might undermine confidence in all the midterm election course of. That daisy chain is psychically actual, it might play out, and that is what I hear election officers most involved about, issues that are not actually a problem, however individuals suppose they're a problem or one thing on social media makes them a momentary difficulty. And all of a sudden, the structure of belief that has existed round our elections for thus lengthy begins to crumble,
MARGARET BRENNAN: I need to do a lightning spherical on a few of these issues you- you debunk. On the mechanics of elections, you write that hand counting is much less correct.
DAVID BECKER: That is proper. And the educational literature is definitely unanimous on this. When you take a look at the counting of ballots, and our ballots in the USA are very complicated, it is not one race, we're actually dozens of races, typically over dozens of pages. And one factor people are very unhealthy at are repetitive actions over time, machines are actually good at that. Now, that does not imply we must always belief the machines completely. We've to have checks on the machines to ensure they did it proper, which is what we had in 2020. They're referred to as actual forensic audits- actual audits, moderately, of the- of the machine expertise that examine the paper ballots- the hand- and there is hand counts of the paper ballots in comparison with what the tabulators mentioned. And in each case, they got here out and proved that the- the, the precise tabulation was correct. So hand counts are a really unhealthy thought if you need speedy, correct counts. If you would like expensive, inaccurate account accounts. Positive, do it by hand.
MAJOR GARRETT: If you would like hand depend, you are introducing the potential for somebody with an agenda counting ballots. Machines haven't any agenda, and there is not any ghosts inside them both.
MARGARET BRENNAN: On poll harvesting. clarify that. How did you debunk that Main?
MAJOR GARRETT: So poll harvesting has develop into this umbrella terminology, which gives the look that persons are rounding up ballots by some very massive quantity, dozens, a whole lot, possibly 1000s--
MARGARET BRENNAN: The phrase itself sounds--
MAJOR GARRETT: The phrase itself sounds vaguely illegitimate. After which they're even this terminology about lack of chain of custody, or mules, like that is some form of drug commerce we're speaking about versus what they're the sacred ballots of particular person Individuals who've registered legally and solid a legally acceptable vote. In some jurisdictions, you're allowed to gather both on behalf of a member of the family or others, a sure restricted variety of ballots and switch them in. That is permissible, and states and localities regulate it based on their guidelines. In Wisconsin, there's a controversy about some individuals in nursing houses that was adjudicated earlier than the election. And everybody knew the principles, it was not a violation of guidelines to gather ballots and bigger numbers in that election than in comparison with earlier elections. However ballots- poll harvesting itself isn't an issue within the 2020 election, was not an issue within the 2020 election and should not be going ahead.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And David - mail-in ballots – due to the pandemic and the circumstances we had been beneath turned widespread, after which these had been referred to as into query by the previous president particularly. What did you debunk about that?
DAVID BECKER: Properly, to start with, we have been utilizing mail ballots since at the least the Civil Warfare if not earlier than then. Mail ballots are part of our historical past. Mail ballots undergo a number of validation processes in each state. It's a must to request a mail poll in lots of states or have been verified as a registered voter and even these states which have all-mail voting, when the poll comes again, the id of the voter is confirmed, normally by means of signature matching. It's- needs to be backed by a sure time period and it's all checked a number of occasions to ensure it really works. It's a must to guarantee that the particular person did not vote one other approach. When you've requested a mail poll, you possibly can't simply present up on the polling place and ask for a poll in particular person. They are going to ask you to give up your mail poll or you are going to should vote provisionally. That is true in every single place in the USA. And one other vital factor is that mail voting is one thing that Republicans previous to 2020 actually embraced and used very, very successfully. They're those that inspired mail voting in locations like Arizona and locations like Washington state. And mail voting was one thing that labored very, very properly for Republican campaigns as much as the 2020 election the place they themselves delegitimize it with none type of actual cause.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And Main, you discuss concerning the political advantages to calling 2020 into query notably for the previous president. However whenever you take a look at the spin ahead right here, based on CBS numbers in battleground states over 60% of Republican candidates on the poll are election deniers. Two of one of the best identified maybe, Kari Lake out in Arizona, and Doug Mastriano in Pennsylvania, who're operating on the Republican platform in these states. Is that this indulging this merely the price of successful an endorsement from the previous president who's a political powerhouse? Or do they consider it?
MAJOR GARRETT: It is actually the previous, getting President Trump's endorsement runs by means of a sieve that requires you to say the 2020 election was stolen. And in the event you say it the loudest of any of the Republicans additionally vying for that endorsement in any explicit state, you are more than likely to get that endorsement. So not solely do it's a must to say it, however it's a must to repeat it and volumize it to get the endorsement of former President Trump. Whether or not or not they consider it, I do not know. It seems they are saying that they do consider it. However Kari Lake is an fascinating instance of this phenomenon. She mentioned earlier than the first was determined that fraud was afoot. She mentioned whereas votes had been being counted, fraud was afoot. She was trailing, after which she got here out forward, late within the course of, and mentioned it was then, due to this fact professional. I'd solely say that's not a veil of hypocrisy. That's the very definition of hypocrisy. The precise course of you assailed is the one which made you the GOP nominee. Subsequently, it is professional solely since you develop into the nominee? That does not add up.
MARGARET BRENNAN: However you body it as properly on this context of the place we at the moment are because the "proxy for the way forward for Trumpism." You say that calling into query is not concerning the mechanics, and the professionals you're speaking about, who work on casting and counting votes, however it's a group of grievances. It is simply this form of image of Trumpism.
MAJOR GARRETT: I've talked to-
MARGARET BRENNAN: Clarify that.
MAJOR GARRETT: I've talked to many Trump supporters who haven't got a coherent or explicable thought of how the election was stolen. They only really feel one thing is incorrect, and by articulating that one thing was incorrect there – that's an act of allegiance to former President Trump, which is essential to them, and their very own political id. They usually're not going to desert the previous president simply because some nagging journalists like me, or an election legislation professional, like David, recommend to them that they should. That loyalty to Trump and Trumpism, I consider, is a group place for the concept that one thing was basically incorrect with the 2020 election, even when they can not precisely clarify what that factor was. They do not need to divorce themselves from former President Trump, and so they don't desire the motion that they had been so impressed by to vanish, due to this fact, they keep right here, despite the fact that they can not routinely clarify why.
MARGARET BRENNAN: However David, we have talked up to now about Democrats who've questioned the result of elections. Republicans usually level to that when that is mentioned. How involved are you now that this sort of language is simply changing into, not normalized, however made into only a political instrument? And that we might see simply common questioning of election outcomes if it does not go the best way the candidate needs it to?
DAVID BECKER: Yeah, I am very involved about that, as a result of factually talking proper now, now we have essentially the most skilled, correct, clear, safe election system we have ever had, and it retains getting higher each election cycle. However –
MARGARET BRENNAN: And it is fascinating you say that, as a result of as , there was this motion to alter voting rights and to guard them. So it's changing into mentioned as if there's something maybe not working proper.
DAVID BECKER: Yeah. And it is it is it is actually troubling within the sense that, whereas it is not ethical equivalence right here, it is not coming equally from each side of the political spectrum. It's undoubtedly coming overwhelmingly from the acute proper, proper now. There actually are elements of it coming from throughout the political spectrum. And we see efforts the place often some persons are unwilling to concede, often there is likely to be an objection in Congress to the electoral vote depend in earlier elections, nothing like we noticed in 2020, the place that was led by the shedding presidential candidate. However we might get to some extent that's if that is seen as politics as typical, that that is simply a part of the sport, that if finally anybody shedding an election would possibly simply say, properly, 'I am not going to tie my fingers round my again. They had been claiming fraud once they misplaced, I will declare one thing else once I lose.' We'll be at a really, very harmful level for our democracy if the shedding aspect can't settle for defeat, particularly in a rustic that is divided 50-50. The place are we as a democracy? We've to be at that time, the identical level that Vice President Gore was at in 2000, or that Vice President Nixon was at in 1960.
MAJOR GARRETT: The nice worry I've, Margaret, is politics is rather a lot just like the NFL, it is a copycat League, no matter succeeds, you replicate. On the appropriate, within the Trump world now, the quickest option to social media, fame and fundraising is to disclaim the 2020 election. You do not suppose Democrats aren't watching that and could also be tempted by the identical social media and fundraising lure- that that has? They are going to be. That is why now we have to cease it, again away from it, and say, not right here, not this place. This a part of our civic life is sacred. We'll examine it and respect it and settle for the outcomes.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And also you write about among the proposed options as properly. Thanks each, for sharing the guide with us and your insights. We'll be again in a second.