How the ‘Counting the Vote’ special on PBS debunks concerns about the election process

On this episode of “The State We’re In,” Melanie Plenda talks with Margaret Hoover, host of PBS’s “Firing Line” about the show’s recent one-hour special, “Counting the Vote.”  It contains fascinating sections about election procedures and all things that, perhaps in the past, people didn't think about much, but today have become embroiled in controversy.

By Rosemary Ford and Caitlin Agnew

This article has been edited for length and clarity.

Melanie Plenda: 

When you were conceiving the special with your team, what went into it? What was it like putting this show together? 

Margaret Hoover:

I’m glad to help shine a light on what I think is ultimately one of the most important functions of democracy, which is how we administer a vote in a way that engenders confidence with the electorate. After 18 months of conceiving of this project and bringing it to air, I have concluded, and I hope viewers will conclude, that there is a very, very good case to be made that elections in the United States are safe, secure, transparent and trustworthy. They are not only those four things – they are the most safe, the most secure, the most transparent and the most trustworthy in the world by a lot, and probably in the course of human history. We have a lot to be confident about, but we also need to shine a light on how we do it, so that we can demystify and answer some of the conspiracy theories and doubts that circulate, so that people will have confidence in the integrity of our elections.

What went into it was simply traveling and talking to people and doing the research. We don't have one election for president in this country on Nov. 5, 2024. We have 50 state elections for electors, and those 50 states administer the elections in 10,000-plus jurisdictions across the country, and in a way that federalism really protects the security of our elections. There's no way to rig the presidential election in this country, which is a wonderful sort of innovation of the founding fathers that is embedded in the Constitution. Every state gets to choose how to administer its votes. What it also means is, when there are states that are incredibly close, one has to really understand how that state chooses to administer its elections. 

Melanie Plenda:

As you went through this process and conducted these interviews what surprised you?

Margaret Hoover:

One of the things that surprised me is that you hear as you evaluate — and we all hear some of the doubts and concerns that are circulated on the Internet amongst our friends and neighbors — one you hear frequently is, “Well, we should just all have paper ballots” because there's this concern or fear that some of the election machinery might be susceptible to being hacked or manipulated. People suggest that perhaps the algorithms can be changed, or we don't know what they are. Actually, as it turns out, about 98% of the ballots in the United States have a paper trail. In other words, you count on a machine, but there is an actual paper ballot correlated to each individual's vote. So we do have a way of checking. There is no way of hacking or manipulating the election machinery or the algorithms or the computers to change the votes because we have a process for hand-counting ballots in certain states just to ensure that they work. Also, many states implement automatic audits, where you audit the vote almost immediately following the vote itself, just to ensure the integrity of the vote. 

The other thing that was really wonderful to see, particularly in the battleground states we visited, but also in the states that are deep red — states like Utah, that administers 100% mail-in voting. The election boards love to have people come and watch. They have basically created facilities where journalists, media, civic groups — any kind of group — can come and visit and see how elections are administered. 

I really encourage anyone who has concern about how your local elections are administered to get in touch with your local election board and see if you can set up a visit or volunteer, because there is, first of all, a real dearth of people who are wanting to volunteer because there have been so many threats leveled at individuals who volunteer. These are volunteers in a service that is critically necessary for representative democracy, that depends on ensuring that we have a stable and confident vote amongst our people in order to secure our elected representatives. Go volunteer and take a look around, because those folks are doing really great work. They're fastidious in every single state about how they count the ballots, secure the ballots, process the ballots, and are doing really good work on behalf of all of us.

Melanie Plenda:

Which states do you think might face some challenges? 

Margaret Hoover:

The first time we saw real challenges to the counting in many, many states, which led to the challenging of accepting the slates of electors at the counting of the electoral ballots last Jan. 6, 2020. The states that were questioned last time are still of concern this time maybe perhaps with the exception of Michigan. But I think Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arizona and Georgia are all states that are going to be very, very close, but they have done different things in each state to prepare. 

So Georgia, for example, passed an election law which actually led to more people voting in 2022 than had ever voted in the state of Georgia before. They've really done a number of things to increase the transparency, security, trustworthiness and integrity of the elections in Georgia. 

On the other hand, Pennsylvania we know will be very, very close. The legislature tried to consider several bills, but they just could never get anything passed in order to lock down any of these standards of election integrity or apply any of these new standards of election integrity.

You'll see in the film a very frustrated election commissioner from Philadelphia, who actually was the only Republican from Philadelphia Election Commission to stand up — well, not the only one, but one of the ones who stood up — and said, “In fact, I've counted and I've recounted and we've re-audited, and I can confirm that Joe Biden won Philadelphia and won Pennsylvania,” to much criticism, frankly, and direct threats by the Republican Party and Donald Trump. But still, Pennsylvania has not taken the steps it needs to pre-process ballots, and so it will take longer for them to process and get a result in Pennsylvania — in particular the Philadelphia area, because in Philadelphia, they cannot start opening ballots and counting ballots until 7 p.m. on Election Day.

Melanie Plenda:

We recently had state primaries for congressional districts and governor. New Hampshire officials have always talked about how secure our elections are — even before 2020, that was really a point of pride for our former secretary of state. What struck me when I listened to the most recent slate of candidates was the number of them who didn’t outright deny the election results, but said, “they had questions” or thought there were “irregularities.” What is the advantage for candidates to say this? You would think in some respects it would depress turnout because they are essentially saying the process might be rigged. What do you think the political calculus is there?

Margaret Hoover:

Well, there isn't a sensible one, honestly. Arizona is a great example actually, where people would say, “Maybe there were some uncertainties or problems in Arizona.” Except Republicans won all down the ballot in Arizona in 2020, but Donald Trump didn't win the state. What happened, as election officials and also former state representatives and electors in Arizona explained, is that many, many Republicans — as many as 12,000 — left the top of the ballot blank, didn't vote for Donald Trump and then voted for Republicans all down ballot. So it's hard if you're a Republican in Arizona to say there was election fraud because you got elected as a Republican, even though Donald Trump didn't. 

I say this as a Republican who has observed what has happened in the Republican Party and the realignment. There has been, I've observed, a shift in how we talk about elections. I think it's so important to shine a light on this issue because, for certain Republicans, it has become a litmus test to suggest there might be something untoward about elections, and if New Hampshire Republicans say the election was great in New Hampshire, it's just somewhere else that there might have been trouble they’re contributing to this sowing of doubt because we have audited elections in all four of the states that were challenged in for the Electoral College in 2020 on January 6. Those ballots have been counted and recounted. They have been audited. They have been viewed by outside groups. You can go look at all of the information and all of the theories, and that's why administration officials from the Trump administration, in the Department of Justice, in the Department of Homeland Security, in the Department of Defense have all said that 2020, was actually the most secure election in American history. 

This is about politics, not about how well we administer our elections, and I think as long as we can point that out to people and people can recognize or actually just ask themselves, if they're hearing some kind of uncertainty around the elections, is this a political point or is this actually about the transparency and the integrity of how my local elections are being administered? 

Because one of the other things that we see recently in the news is that many people believe that their state and their locality does a good job administering elections, but they worry about other states. I think that's another piece of this too, that transparency helps shine a light on how every state does this, and how we can improve the functioning of the election administration in each state. It's up to each state legislature and each secretary of state and governor to get that done in their state. But, I think, too often casting doubt on the integrity of our elections has become a political talking point on the right that actually undermines the public's confidence in our elections. 

Melanie Plenda:

What are you working on now for “Firing Line?” What’s coming up in the next few weeks? 

Margaret Hoover:

I think I can tease that we’re planning to have Gen. H.R. McMaster on the program in the coming weeks. I also plan to have some election administration officials on the program to talk about what has been happening in some of these key swing states that are likely to be states that we're talking about on election night and election week that take a little bit of time to vote. 

An election official from Arizona will be on along with an election official from Michigan, and a Republican election lawyer, will also be on. We're going to just spend some time making sure that the public is aware that we're probably not going to know the answer of who won the election on Nov. 5. It's going to take several days, maybe even a week or two, to ensure that all the ballots are counted, especially with the tragic and really cataclysmic storms that have hit Florida and North Carolina that will just inevitably slow down the process. We want to make sure we count every ballot and ensure that it is secure and transparent and trustworthy and fair.

Melanie Plenda:

Margaret Hoover, host of “Firing Line,” thank you so much for joining us. 


The State We’re In” is a weekly digital public affairs show produced by NH PBS and The Marlin Fitzwater Center for Communications. It is shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative, of which both organizations are members. These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.