Some critics of this proposal may say this agency is nothing more than a federal power grab — state and local administrators are perfectly capable of doing their jobs without interference from Washington. And yes, many talented and highly capable election administrators have done heroic work this year under nearly impossible circumstances. But a new agency should support them, ensuring they have the resources they need to succeed. And frankly, partisan state legislatures, governors and secretaries of state are often the ones who make their jobs harder.
Critics could also point out that this elections agency could be used for partisan advantage. That’s why the agency must have a strong mandate, based on widely supported principles of democratic fairness, as well as an empowered inspector general to monitor any potential abuses of that power. We propose an extensive vetting process for agency appointees: a bipartisan, blue-ribbon commission could put forth a short list of names and nominees would be confirmed by the House of Representatives — a more broadly representative body than the Senate.
Appointees would have to abide by a robust conflict-of-interest policy, as well as a legally binding pledge of allegiance to the integrity of the voting process and the public interest. Taken together, these structural safeguards make us optimistic that the agency would serve its intended purpose.
No agency is perfect. But as with any change, the test should not be to compare it to some idealized standard of perfection but, rather, against the status quo. Our patchwork system empowers partisans to shape the rules, increases the chances of foreign hackers finding a weak link in the chain and leads to inconsistencies that fuel litigation, conspiracy theories and confusion.
Naturally, this proposed Federal Elections Agency has no chance of happening unless Democrats manage to narrowly retake the Senate. But if a fair, secure and straightforward election system is the foundation of a functioning democracy, we need to invest in it — as soon as feasibly possible.
Charlotte Hill, a board member of FairVote and RepresentUs, is a Ph.D. candidate at the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley. Lee Drutman, a senior fellow at New America, is the author of “Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America.”
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.