Election Security and the Role of Misinformation
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is gearing up to release reports regarding the integrity of state election systems. This comes amidst growing concerns about the spread of misinformation by election deniers. As these reports are published, it is crucial for the public to remain vigilant against misleading narratives.
President Trump’s second term has been marked by efforts to exert control over election systems. In March, he directed DHS to assess the security of election technology and review voter rolls for potential inaccuracies. Subsequently, DHS revised its organizational structure to introduce a deputy assistant secretary for elections integrity, a role now occupied by Heather Honey.
Known for her controversial claims about Pennsylvania elections, Honey has been criticized for promoting unfounded allegations, such as the debunked assertion of more votes than voters in the 2020 election. Her appointment has unsettled many, as she reiterated claims of widespread fraud during discussions with election officials, referencing a discredited report on voting machines.
Since 2017, DHS and the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency have supported states in securing election infrastructure. However, the department’s credibility is now questioned. For example, Arizona officials did not seek DHS assistance after a local election website hack, citing reliability concerns. Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes has warned that including individuals like Honey could damage trust in DHS as a dependable election security partner.
Experts identify tactics used to spread false narratives, such as using actual events and data to lend credibility to baseless theories, and misleading titles that distort factual findings.
Cherry-Picked Data
Honey has been instrumental in attempts to discredit the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), a bipartisan initiative helping states manage voter rolls accurately and reduce fraud. Conspiracy theories have led several Republican-led states to withdraw from ERIC, despite its data-driven approach to improving voter registration accuracy.
An analysis by Votebeat and Spotlight PA revealed that Honey’s claims against ERIC omitted crucial metrics. She selectively focused on address-related removals from 2020, ignoring other years where ERIC states demonstrated more effective voter roll management. The analysis contradicted Honey’s conclusions, affirming that ERIC member states consistently removed ineligible voters more effectively than non-ERIC states.
Misrepresentation of Election Systems and Processes
Though Honey often uses official data, her interpretations are frequently misleading. The Pennsylvania Department of State clarified that Honey’s claim about excessive ballots in the 2020 election stemmed from incomplete data uploads. Voter roll data is routinely updated, making static snapshots unreliable for assessing voter participation.
In another instance, Honey inaccurately claimed Pennsylvania sent ballots to unverified voters, misunderstanding a security feature within ballot processing systems. Despite corrections from election authorities, Honey has not retracted her claims.
Misleading Report Titles and Headings
Honey contributed to the disputed 2021 election audit in Maricopa County, Arizona, conducted by Cyber Ninjas. The report contained misleading headings that exaggerated its findings. For instance, it suggested illegal voting based on inaccurate address verification data. While no fraud was found, and the ballot count matched official results, former President Trump cited the report to question election integrity.
Unreliable Data Sources and Tools
Honey’s organization, PA Fair Elections, has advocated for voter purges using data from EagleAI, a tool linked to a Trump donor-funded super PAC. The Brennan Center criticized EagleAI for relying on inadequate public data, risking wrongful disenfranchisement. EagleAI’s findings largely replicate existing election processes, straining resources amid cuts and staffing challenges.
• • •
The decision by DHS to appoint a figure known for promoting discredited election theories represents a shift in its approach to election security. As DHS prepares to release upcoming reports, it is crucial for the public to critically evaluate the information within the context of these patterns of misinformation.
