The Lesson from the Carter-Baker Report We Still Need to Learn

Twenty years ago, the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, co-chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, published a pivotal examination of U.S. elections. The Commission’s report, Building Confidence in U.S. Elections, came at a time much like our own, a time of deep concern and distrust, in the wake of the disputed 2000 election.

The Commission warned that even the appearance of partisanship in election administration could weaken public trust. As it stated, “the perception of partiality is as important, if not more so, than the reality.” In response, it recommended steps to minimize conflicts of interest, including clear ethical standards, more professionalized administration, and nonpartisan selection of key election officials.

As the Commission noted, “most other democratic countries have found ways to insulate electoral administration from politics and partisanship.”

While many of the Carter-Baker Commission’s technical recommendations in other areas have been implemented, its five overarching proposals regarding impartial election administration remain unfulfilled.

Election Reformers Network is working to change that.

The Commission focused in part on conflicts of interest for secretaries of state and other election officials. Its report identified activities—such as public endorsements, campaign fundraising, or active party leadership—as incompatible with the role of overseeing elections. Yet today, no state fully prohibits the practices the Commission deemed problematic. Likewise, no states currently choose their chief election officers in a nonpartisan way, nor do they require relevant skills and experience in election administration to qualify for the job.

Several Election Reformers Network objectives directly address the report’s proposals, these include:

• ‍Advancing reforms to promote nonpartisan election governance: “Congress and the states should reconstitute election management institutions on a nonpartisan basis to make them more independent and effective.” (Recommendation 6.1.1)

• Safeguarding against conflicts of interest for election officials: “States should prohibit senior election officials from serving or assisting political campaigns in a partisan way…” (Recommendation 6.1.3)

• Elevating experienced professionals over ambitious politicians: “Individuals who serve as [a] state’s chief election officer [should be] chosen based on their capability, integrity, and nonpartisanship.” (Recommendation 6.1.4)

Making these changes is all the more important given shifts in the political context between then and now. The Commission completed its report in the shadow of the contested 2000 presidential election, which involved irregularities and perceived partisan actions by some election officials, notably Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris. Unfortunately, the polarization and distrust the Commission noted in its report have only increased during the past two decades:

• Public opinion trends suggest that trust in elections now varies sharply along partisan lines—often shifting depending on whether one’s preferred candidates win or lose.

• Litigation has also become a defining feature of election cycles: between the 2000 and 2024 presidential elections, the number of election-related lawsuits tripled.

• Election officials have come under unprecedented scrutiny. In several states, local officials have chosen not to certify results, prompting court intervention. Reports of harassment and threats against election workers have increased, contributing to higher turnover among experienced staff.

At the same time, the communications environment has become more complex. Social media, viral misinformation, and polarized media ecosystems shape how voters perceive elections long before ballots are cast.

Beyond its specific recommendations, perhaps the most important and enduring legacy of the Commission’s work is its very elevation of the structural vulnerabilities present in the U.S. election system.

Understanding and addressing these structural vulnerabilities on a bipartisan basis is essential for strengthening public trust in the democratic process, especially in our intensely polarized era. On that front, the Commission on Federal Election Reform stands as an enduring model for productive collaboration that reaches across the aisle and promotes the free, fair, and impartial elections that all Americans deserve.

Nearly two decades later, that commitment to bipartisanship continues to be exemplified by the Carter Center and the Baker Institute for Public Policy, which will co-host their annual election conference on December 8 to elevate key principles for American election administration (register here).

This ongoing work is essential to advancing reforms that address the Commission’s key insight: election administration must not only be fair—it must be seen as fair.