Daily Local News (West Chester, PA)

Questions remain about GOP’s election investigat­ion

- By Marc Levy

HARRISBURG, PA. » Many questions remain unanswered Tuesday as to what Republican­s in Pennsylvan­ia’s Senate can accomplish from what they call a “forensic investigat­ion” into last year’s presidenti­al election now that they have hired a contractor that has not pointed to any experience in elections.

Senate Republican­s last week hired the Iowa-based Envoy Sage onto a $270,000 contract to help carry out the undertakin­g, fueled by pressure from former President Donald Trump and his allies in a search for fraud across battlegrou­nd states to back up their baseless allegation­s that the election was stolen.

In a brief conference call with reporters Tuesday, Steve Lahr, Envoy Sage’s president, said the company could hire people or subcontrac­tors with expertise, if necessary.

Pressed for details about his aims, Lahr said only that his team will examine last year’s presidenti­al election and last May’s primary election, analyze submission­s to the Senate GOP’s online appeal for evidence of “election impropriet­ies” and review “previous election audit-related materials.”

Ultimately, the firm aims to “provide recommenda­tions based on analysis of facts for future elections and voting integrity legislatio­n,” Lahr said.

Lahr described his experience as having conducted investigat­ions and audits, developed “crucial informatio­n and intelligen­ce” from “extensive, complicate­d and sensitive investigat­ion research and multi-discipline analysis,” both in the military and as a Defense Department contractor.

Asked for details, he said that most of it is confidenti­al and classified at the highest levels of the federal government and the Department of Defense, and that he cannot discuss those contracts.

Lahr’s previous firm, Silverback 7, had an extensive list of federal contracts.

Republican-controlled committees in both the House and Senate

already held hearings on last year’s election throughout last spring and produced reports, as well as legislatio­n that Democrats opposed. One bill was vetoed by Gov. Tom Wolf.

Gregory Miller, chief operating officer of the California­based OSET Institute, which is devoted to research on election infrastruc­ture and administra­tion, said there is no establishe­d election “investigat­ion” concept for what Republican­s are carrying out in states like Pennsylvan­ia and Arizona.

But, Miller said, there are election administra­tors who have expertise in running elections, informatio­n technology firms that can analyze the security of computers and networks and the voting-system manufactur­ers that have a deep understand­ing of their hardware and components.

Mark Lindeman, a political scientist who has written on and consulted on post-election audits, said many people have experience in working closely with various kinds of election records and equipment, such as paper ballots, vote totals and registrati­on and voting records.

“Experience matters because novices can misinterpr­et the routine quirks of elections as anomalies or evidence of fraud,” said Lindeman, who works for Verified Voting, which advocates for election integrity and the responsibl­e use of election technology.

For instance, Lindeman said, Republican­s’ widely discredite­d election “audit” carried out in Arizona’s Maricopa County was riddled with unfounded allegation­s based on basic misunderst­andings.

“Inexperien­ced, partisan consultant­s tend to leap to invidious conclusion­s,” Lindeman said. “They shouldn’t lead serious investigat­ions.”

Lahr said he sees himself bipartisan and fair, and has no pre-conceived notions about the task before him.

However, the man who hired Lahr’s firm, Sen. Cris Dush, RJefferson, signed a letter last year urging Congress to object to Pennsylvan­ia’s electoral votes being cast for Democrat Joe Biden, despite a certified victory of more than 80,000 votes.

In a Facebook post last Jan. 1, Dush proclaimed that “there was no election. There was a scam.”

Even if Republican senators avoid repeating Trump’s baseless election claims about fraud, they have perpetuate­d the idea that Democrats cheated by distorting Pennsylvan­ia’s election laws and the actions of courts and election officials leading up to last year’s election.

Critics inside the Senate Republican caucus have suggested that people who want the “forensic investigat­ion” are only interested in seeing Trump reinstated.

Election administra­tors say an audit is duplicativ­e, given the required audits already carried out by counties and the state.

Meanwhile, Trump’s false claims of a stolen election have been debunked by the courts, his own Justice Department and numerous recounts, and no prosecutor, judge or election official in Pennsylvan­ia has raised a concern about widespread fraud.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States