If the election results are contested, would America’s adversaries exploit the period of transition from the Biden administration to the 47th U.S. president? File Photo by Jemal Countess/UPI | License Photo
At long last, election 2024 is upon us. Six days from now, Nov. 5th, marks E-Day. But formally determining the 47th president of the United States may take weeks or months. In that context and as this column has noted, Nov. 5 is Guy Fawkes Day in Britain, a date commemorating when in 1605, a plot to blow up Parliament was uncovered. This may have meaning.
According to polls, few elections have been closer. Like in 2000 and 2020, the results almost certainly will be contested. Unless one of the candidates wins the Electoral College and the popular vote by a significant margin, the magnitude of these claims could be massive. In 2000, the Supreme Court only had one case to resolve: Bush v. Gore. Suppose now there are dozens of other cases that need resolution. The judiciary could be overwhelmed. Advertisement Advertisement
There is another worrying aspect of the election, one that is procedural and not related to the candidates. The transition of administrations will take place over 76 days, from Nov. 5 to Jan. 20 and the inauguration. Because Kamala Harris became the Democratic nominee only after President Joe Biden withdrew, she has had a truncated period to consider who might serve in her administration.
Donald Trump has publicly acknowledged that after his 2016 victory he was not sufficiently familiar with Washington to put in place an administration to his liking. As someone who visited Trump Tower in New York during the transition then, it was chaos. Trump was correct. The transition went very poorly.
Unless Harris is prepared to retain a substantial portion of the Biden team, her transition may prove to be as rocky as Trump’s first, given the time constraints. And another factor may upset this transition. Suppose on Jan. 20, the Electoral College has failed to choose a president.
In that case, the Speaker of the House will assume the presidency — Republican Michael Johnson or Democrat Hakim Jeffries, depending on which party wins control of the chamber. Common sense would conclude that Biden appointees might be asked to continue to serve. Or a significant number of cabinet heads would be “acting,” namely officials who have been Senate confirmed and elevated on a temporary basis. Advertisement
Americans may be amused or frustrated with this situation. But here is a crucial and unasked question: would America’s adversaries exploit this transition period when the government is not fully formed, regardless of whether an elected president has taken the oath of office? Moreover, another procedural issue could have even greater impact.
Even in so-called “normal” times, given the Senate confirmation process, it takes many months for an administration to be fully formed. Suppose the Senate and president are from different parties. Would it make the confirmation process even more testing?
All this suggests the United States faces a potential electoral vulnerability in which its government may not be able to respond sufficiently to major foreign crises, as well as being susceptible to political interference by our adversaries. Russian president and former KGB agent Vladimir Putin would surely appreciate this condition and opportunities, as would China’s President Xi Jingping. One wonders who among both U.S. parties is aware of this potential vulnerability. And even if there was full awareness, what could be done to lessen the likelihood of those wishing us ill to exploit this vulnerability?
Of course, our adversaries may choose to ignore this vulnerability, instead allowing the American political process to do its worst. Yet, is this too tempting an opportunity to forgo? And if so, how might events unfold? Advertisement
The most dire cases would be Russia escalating the war in Ukraine by threatening the use of nuclear weapons or North Korean soldiers to overwhelm the Ukrainian army, and China threatening to invade Taiwan. Of course, the Biden administration remains in power until Jan. 20. So a timetable for a potential major escalation would likely not start until mid- to late January.
During the transition interim, however, foreign interference is a fact of life. Fortunately, the government agencies tasked with dealing with these threats largely consist of career professionals who are not directly affected by potential vulnerabilities. But one conclusion is inescapable.
The Founding Fathers never anticipated the potential vulnerabilities that might arise from the electoral process, yet Thomas Jefferson believed the Constitution should be revised as the times demanded. In recognition of modern transportation, the inauguration date was constitutionally changed from March 4th to Jan. 20th in 1933.
Another constitutional change is essential to relieve the vulnerabilities we face now. But it may take a catastrophe for that to happen.
Harlan Ullman is UPI’s Arnaud de Borchgrave Distinguished Columnist, a senior advisor at Washington’s Atlantic Council, the prime author of “shock and awe” and author of “The Fifth Horseman and the New MAD: How Massive Attacks of Disruption Became the Looming Existential Danger to a Divided Nation and the World at Large.” Follow him @harlankullman. The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author. Advertisement
