Today a distinguished group of Georgia civic leaders will gather at The Carter Center to discuss “The State of Election Integrity in Georgia.” The organizations participating include some of our state’s most respected individuals— former U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss, former Gov. Roy Barnes, former Gov. Nathan Deal, and former Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin. Their public service and commitment to democracy command admiration. The unwavering dedication of The Carter Center to democratic values is admired around the globe. The newer American Bar Association’s Task Force for American Democracy stands for the defense of the Constitution and the rule of law in strengthening our democracy.
But as the event draws near, there are urgent concerns that must be raised.
While these leaders prepare to offer continuing public assurances that Georgia’s elections are “secure, fair, and accurate,” those messages run counter to well-established findings from the federal court in Curling v. Raffensperger and to the conclusions of the nation’s foremost election security experts. It is unlikely that the participants and dedicated public servants have been exposed to this full body of evidence or had access to the independent expertise needed to assess the condition of Georgia’s actual election system.
In a November 2023 ruling, U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg found that Georgia’s touchscreen voting system poses a substantial risk to the integrity of the state’s elections. The Court found that that the system’s vulnerabilities are “neither hypothetical nor remote,” and warned that it is a matter of “when, not if” they will be exploited. These findings came after years of expert testimony, verification of technical evidence, and vigorous legal scrutiny.
Not complying with state, federal laws
Georgia is significantly out of compliance with both state and federal election laws, including the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). It mandates verifiable and private voting, and Georgia’s touchscreen system fails to meet those requirements. Georgia voters in polling places cannot cast a vote they can read or verify, given the inscrutable QR code that becomes their official vote. Nor can they cast a secret ballot. The credibility of results is undermined, and unauditable, because audits depend on voter-verified trustworthy ballots as source records, which are not available in Georgia.
Even more troubling is the 2021 breach of Georgia’s election software in Coffee County. The stolen highly exploitable software was illegally distributed, yet the state has not replaced or secured the compromised systems. As Totenberg noted, the state “stood by for far too long,” and has implemented no mitigation. Yet officials continue to insist— without foundation— that the elections are secure.
In the face of all this, many of the organizations associated with this week’s event, including The Democracy Defense Project, the ABA Task Force for American Democracy, and The Carter Center, have publicly encouraged voters to have confidence in Georgia’s elections— describing them as accurate, transparent, and secure. These are noble goals. But noble goals should never be allowed to obscure inconvenient facts that endanger the very democratic values that drive the missions of these organizations.
An episode from history may be instructive. When Galileo demonstrated that the Earth was not the center of the universe, he invited church authorities to look through his telescope. Many clerics refused. It wasn’t that they were anti-science or malicious. They simply feared that seeing the truth might upend the worldview and church doctrine they felt compelled to defend. Their refusal delayed human understanding by decades.
Similarly today, Georgia’s civic leaders are being offered clear evidence— from the federal court and from the nation’s top experts—that the state’s voting system is deeply flawed and poses unacceptable risks to democratic elections. But some seem reluctant to “look through the telescope.”
‘Mistaken message that elections merit trust’
A summary of the federal court’s findings compiled by expert Susan Greenhalgh of Free Speech For People provides a foundation for facts, put through the rigors of years in the judicial process in Coalition for Good Governance’s Curling v. Raffensperger voting system litigation.
When respected voices lend their credibility to assurances that are not grounded in fact, they do not restore lasting confidence— they unwittingly undermine it. We have reached out to the sponsoring organizations and asked that they carefully review the rigorously vetted facts about Georgia’s elections before delivering more mistaken messages that the elections merit trust and confidence. Sadly, they don’t.
Georgia needs these civic leaders now more than ever. Their voices carry great weight in shaping public opinion and policy. But to fulfill that role, they must seek the full truth— not just the version offered by state officials with reputational interests in play. That means hearing from independent cybersecurity, voting system and election auditing experts. It means reviewing the record compiled by the federal court. And it means asking whether this system truly complies with the law and offers voters the security and privacy the law is meant to protect.
To lead well, sometimes we must be willing to see what we wish were not true.
It’s time to look through the telescope.
Marilyn Marks is the executive director of the Coalition for Good Governance.
