Report: The Georgia Election Board is a Threat
Changes in the Makeup of the Board and in the Rules Threaten Chaos in November
There is very good reason to worry about the way votes are going to be certified (or not) in Georgia — a key battleground state. Since 2020 the republican dominated assembly has largely endorsed election denialism and in line with this, has implemented changes that have politicized the process. The changes are a clear threat to the legitimacy and integrity of the election outcome—particularly so if a democrat wins. This is a background foundational report on the status of vote tabulation and certification in Georgia. It’s a baseline from which I will track matters there as we go forward.
Overview of Georgia's Election Board and Recent Changes
1. Georgia's Election Structure:
State Election Board (SEB): The SEB oversees elections and ensures compliance with state laws. It was traditionally composed of the Secretary of State (serving as the chair) and four other members, with both parties represented.
County Election Boards: Each county has its own election board responsible for managing local elections, vote counting, and certification.
2. Legislative Changes Post-2020:
Senate Bill 202 (SB 202): Passed in March 2021, this bill significantly altered Georgia's election procedures. One of the most controversial aspects was the restructuring of the SEB:
Removal of the Secretary of State: SB 202 removed the Secretary of State from the chairmanship, making them an ex-officio (non-voting) member.
Appointment Power Shift: The chair of the SEB is now appointed by the General Assembly, giving the legislature more control over the election process. The General Assembly is currently controlled by Republicans. Thus the power to make appointments is now firmly in the hands of republicans in the assembly.
County Board Takeover Provision: SB 202 allows the SEB to take over local election boards if they deem them to be underperforming. This has raised concerns about partisan takeovers in key counties. Think Fulton County, for example — democratic stronghold around Atlanta. This appear to be a key target of this provision.
3. Composition of the State Election Board Post-SB 202:
The current board consists of five members:
Chair: Appointed by the General Assembly.
Two Members: Appointed by the General Assembly (one by the House Speaker, one by the Senate President Pro Tempore).
One Member: Appointed by the Governor.
One Member: Appointed by the House Minority Leader (typically a Democrat).
As of now, the board has a 3-2 Republican majority, with the chair and two other members being appointed by Republican-controlled bodies.
4. Concerns and Actions by the Board:
Gwinnett and Fulton Counties: These are two of Georgia's largest counties and critical in statewide elections. Fulton County, in particular, has been under scrutiny:
Fulton County Investigation: The SEB has initiated an investigation into Fulton County's handling of the 2020 election. Critics argue this is politically motivated, aimed at undermining confidence in the election results.
Potential Takeovers: There have been discussions within the SEB about possibly taking over Fulton County’s election board due to alleged mismanagement. This would give the SEB direct control over election administration in one of Georgia's most populous and Democratic-leaning counties.
5. Influence of Pro-Trump Groups:
Several board members have ties to pro-Trump organizations or have publicly supported the former president's claims of election fraud.
Mark Davis: A newly appointed member with a history of challenging election results and advocating for stricter voting laws. He has been involved in various election-related lawsuits.
Brad Carver: A Republican lawyer and another key figure in the board's new makeup, has been vocal about election integrity and has pushed for tighter controls over absentee voting and voter ID requirements.
6. Implications for Future Elections:
There can be no doubt that the shift in control and the actions taken by the SEB threaten to influence the outcome of future elections, particularly in closely contested races.
The possibility of the SEB taking control of county election boards, especially in Democratic-leaning areas, raises serious questions about the fairness of the vote-counting and certification process.
7. Current Status and Future Developments:
Ongoing monitoring of the SEB’s actions, especially regarding potential takeovers of county election boards, will be critical leading up to the 2024 elections.
The impact of these changes on voter confidence and participation, particularly among minority voters in urban areas, is also a key area of concern.
Key Players in Georgia’s Election Interference Investigation
Based on the recent developments and reviews of multiple sources, here are the key players currently involved in Georgia’s election processes that may be relevant to your investigation:
1. John Fervier
Position: Chair of the Georgia State Election Board.
Background: Appointed by Republican Governor Brian Kemp. Fervier has generally acted as a moderating influence on the board, often siding with Democratic appointee Sara Tindall Ghazal against more extreme proposals. However, his role is critical as he holds significant sway over decisions that could impact election certifications.
2. Sara Tindall Ghazal
Position: Democratic appointee to the Georgia State Election Board.
Background: Ghazal is a former election attorney and is currently the sole Democratic voice on the board. She has consistently opposed recent rule changes that could potentially delay or block the certification of election results. Her role is essential in highlighting the opposition to what many view as partisan moves within the board.
3. Janice Johnston
Position: Member of the Georgia State Election Board.
Background: Appointed by the Georgia GOP. Johnston has a history of supporting Trump and attended a Trump rally, raising concerns about her objectivity in election-related decisions. She has supported rule changes that give the board more control over county election certifications, which many critics see as a way to influence election outcomes.
4. Rick Jeffares
Position: Member of the Georgia State Election Board.
Background: Appointed by the GOP-controlled State Senate. Jeffares is another key figure in pushing through rule changes that could enable the board to intervene more directly in county-level election results.
5. Janelle King
Position: Member of the Georgia State Election Board.
Background: Appointed by the GOP-controlled State House of Representatives. King has aligned with Johnston and Jeffares in supporting measures that potentially undermine the straightforward certification of election results.
6. Cleta Mitchell
Position: Trump ally and organizer for election denial groups.
Background: Mitchell is notable for her involvement in the infamous phone call between Trump and Brad Raffensperger in January 2021. She has influenced local election board members like those in Fulton County, advocating for the refusal to certify election results based on unsubstantiated claims of fraud.
7. David Sumrall
Position: Chair of Bibb County GOP.
Background: Sumrall has used the Eagle AI platform to challenge voter registrations in Bibb County, leading to the removal of some voters from the rolls. His actions exemplify the growing trend of using technology to challenge and potentially disenfranchise voters.
8. Catherine Engelbrecht
Position: Founder of True the Vote.
Background: Engelbrecht has promoted the use of apps like IV3 to challenge voter registrations en masse. Her organization has been involved in significant efforts to cast doubt on the legitimacy of voter rolls and has influenced similar actions in Georgia.
This is meant to be a foundational report and a resource as we take a deeper look at Georgia going forward.