Democracy, from A to Z
Hey everyone!
Welcome to week 9 (!) with yours truly at IFES! Whether you're a long-time listener/first-time caller, or you just moseyed on over here while reading the other great blogs that my classmates have written, settle in and enjoy – because this week, we're talking about the State Department and Congress. Strap in, crew.
This past Wednesday, IFES hosted an in-the-city "intern day" for all of us working there this summer. To start, we headed over to the State Department and got to speak with officials on DRG/DRL (DRG means Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance, while DRL switches Governance for Labor) issues across the globe. In the afternoon, we got to speak with a senior staffer on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee about Congressional work on the same issues!
At the State Department, we were greeted by officials and interns who showed us around and gave us the entire morning (and ultimately a large chunk of their afternoon) to meet with them. We got the chance to speak about the work the agency does to collaboratively and sustainably support democratic processes and elections in numerous countries – I was also able to speak about some of the democratic backsliding and electoral issues I’ve seen in the cases and regions I’ve researched (and as you may have read in a few of my previous blogs). We discussed the waves of backlash against electronic voting machines in many developing countries, increases in perceptions of widespread voter fraud, and ways the State Department has, on its own and with partner organizations like IFES, worked to combat this backsliding.
In the afternoon, we then got to speak with a senior-level staffer on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on many of the same issues, but with a focus on legislation designed to counter these developments in many countries. Much of the discussion centered on the work of the members of the committee in writing such bills and gathering information from organizations that are, for example, working on protecting democratic institutions in Ukraine amidst the invasion, or promoting democracy in West Africa. Congressional delegation trips, reports from NGOs on their on-the-ground work – the information gathered from these doesn’t just go into some void; instead, it informs the bills put in front of these very same members (independent of whether the political process, of course, allows those bills to see the light of day).
I'm not sure if I have a (now) weekly, half-understandable attempt of an analysis to offer you in this blog post. Before law school, I worked in electoral politics back in Texas and did another stint of the same in DC. I can sit here, type, and dishonestly tell you all that the switch from "national elections" to "international elections" was a natural stepping point in the growth of my interests. They're two letters apart, they both have strong presences in DC, and they're both more relevant than ever. But when was the last time you saw a candidate for national office (namely Congress, though President applies too) talk about the need to help stabilize and bring relief to Sudan, or support judicial independence in Nigeria? The Russian Invasion of Ukraine and the Israeli/Gaza War are the two most prominent global catastrophes today and certainly receive some lip service from the news. But why don't we care about the others as much? Are they not as worthy? And even if we answer that question, two more take its place: what, then, is to be done? And how?
For those have you have kept up with my blog, you've seen me use Zambia once or twice as a "crutch" for just how bad things can seem during election season. The cases I read from the country during its 2021 elections were harrowing – campaign staffers were killed, voters were terrorized, and accusations of fraud were constantly repeated. While I hope I would've been brave enough to stand up to these things on campaigns in my early 20s, I've never stared down the barrel of a gun while standing in line to vote, and I have no desire to. I got into campaigns after college because it sounded fun, I thought it would be something noble, and I thought I'd be good at it. Would I have stayed if the going got tough? If people we're threatening my family? Me?
Thankfully I haven't had to answer that yet. However, Zambia – a "shithole" country, lest we forget – and its citizens, have. Its people, each likely braver than me, lined up to cast their vote in the face of these hurdles and more. And when that didn't work, they continued to get upset about their conditions. And when that didn't work, they went to court. And while that partially worked, crackdowns persisted and the government elected in 2021 continued with business-as-usual. However, protests continued – either Zambians didn't get the message, or they just really don't care.
Where does this all fit into my above discussion of the State Department, Congress, and broader considerations about the role of the U.S. in intervening (positively) in situations like Zambia's, or Nigeria's, or Sudan's, or Nepal's, or Kenya's, or Malawi's, or so and so's? How do we make this an issue that we care about? Is it as simple as me calling up my senators, Ted Cruz and John Cornyn, and reading these blog posts to them? Or maybe it's enough that I get to bring awareness about these situations to you, the readers of this blog?
Of course it isn't enough! What right do we have to call ourselves citizens of a democracy if we cash out our chips that easily? We don't give up because the government fails to represent our will, we vote. We send emails. We knock on doors. We protest. We sue. All things that the people of Zambia did – and still do – when change needed to occur. Maybe the State Department and USAID could do more to support democracy abroad; I haven't seen the budget, and I'm not going to pretend that I have a solution to all of the world's problems. Further, I was taken aback at how invested certain members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee were in visiting foreign nations to get an on-the-ground look at efforts to promote honest elections, strong democratic institutions, and a cohesive civil spirit. Could there be ulterior motives? Possibly. But it never hurts to hope.
As easy as it is to wax on about how our institutions aren't doing enough, the honest-to-God truth is that the work is being done – by incredibly smart and accomplished people at the State Department, in Congress (both elected members and professional staff), in other agencies, at NGOs like IFES, and on the ground by citizens of these countries driving this change. As I sit here and stew about how we could be doing more abroad, and as my fellow citizens and I sit and fume about what's going on in our own country, an important question might be where we need to be more invested.
On that note, see you all next week for one last post!
Hank