Though I have tremendous respect for Benjamin L. Ginsberg, allowing this trail of post-2020 election reviews to run its course, as he suggested in his Oct. 3 Sunday Opinion essay, “Don’t be afraid of the election audits. They may be our only ticket out of this mess.,” seems more like a recipe for failure than success.

If all 2020 post-election reviews were carried out in accordance with post-election audit best practices, Mr. Ginsberg would surely have a point. But that simply isn’t the case here. Post-election reviews, such as the recently completed one in Arizona, are being undertaken with insufficient transparency, security and/or accuracy. And even when they reaffirm the election results, those questioning the results’ legitimacy are still not satisfied.

Those who believe in genuine democracy need to pursue a dual strategy of “resist and reach out,” to paraphrase a former rabbi of mine, in response to these trust-depleting shenanigans. Post-election “audits” that lack proper procedures need to continue being scrutinized and resisted. And where there’s room for actual improvement in our election systems, folks from across the political spectrum need to reach out together and act.

In light of 2020, we should all agree on the requirement of paper ballots, strong chain-of-custody protocols and robust post-election audits. If not, flawed election reviews will continue to undermine our democratic system as a whole.

David Levine, Washington

The writer is an elections integrity
fellow at the Alliance for
Securing Democracy.