Episode Transcript: David Levine

This transcript has been lightly edited for clarity and consistency

Cold Open

Intro
Hello, hello, hello—and welcome to What Voting Means to Me. I’m your host, Mara Suttmann-Lea, and as always, I’m so glad you’re here.

In this episode, I sit down with David Levine, a longtime election official, international observer, and is currently serving as the director of elections and general registrar for the city of Richmond, Virginia. We talk about what it means to safeguard democracy from both foreign and domestic threats—and what it looks like to hold that responsibility in your bones, day after day, when the world feels uncertain.

David shares stories from Moldova to Maryland, from mobile voting food trucks to countering AI-driven disinformation. But what stands out most, I think, is the steady heartbeat beneath it all: his belief that participation is power. That voting is not just a right—it’s a bulwark. And that showing up, again and again, in all our imperfect ways, is how democracy survives.

This conversation touched me deeply—not only as a political scientist and democracy advocate, but as a human being trying to stay soft in a hardening world. David reminds us that compassion, empathy, and vigilance are not opposites. That we can both resist and reach out.

So with that, I invite you to listen in—and reflect on what voting means to you.
Here is David Levine.

Introductory Music

Mara:
Welcome to What Voting Means to Me. So happy to have you here, David. And I'm going to ask the question that I ask all of my guests from the outset, which is: What is your first memory of living in a democracy?

David:
Well, thanks so much for having me on. You know, my first memory of democracy—perhaps—is being a little tyke and going along with my parents to vote. My parents actually met working on a political campaign for former Congressman Lester Wolff. And while they didn’t end up going into politics or working elections the way that I do, I think from that experience, they understood just how important it was to be engaged in a civic way and to participate.

So I have memories of going with them to vote and being told that—even though they might hope I would vote in a way that resembled what they did—irrespective of how I would vote, I needed to vote and participate. That was one of the things that made American democracy, democracy.

It’s something I really took to heart. And it wasn’t just my parents—I have memories of my grandfather, who was a poll watcher. I actually still have some of his badges from the mid-20th century when he served in that role for his political party. It’s something I carry with me now when I do election observation.

Mara:
Do you have any particularly memorable early voting experiences? Maybe your first time voting, or any elections that really stood out as impactful?

David:
I think the 2020 presidential election really stands out. I actually voted by mail in the primary election where I live. I guess I should say I voted pretty well ahead of Election Day. I was struck by the lengths to which election officials were going to ensure that voters could not only cast a ballot successfully, but also do so safely.

They were having to adopt policies in many places sort of on the fly, as a result of the pandemic. I was able to vote by mail and do so pretty successfully. But I was struck by the education and the engagement around that process—considering how quickly Maryland, and of course Maryland wasn’t unique, had to shift from largely in-person voting to a vote-by-mail model.

That really stood out to me. There was obviously a lot that had to be changed, and I say that as a former election official. In terms of outreach, training workers who were going to process the ballots, implementing precautions and safeguards to keep people safe in election offices—and making sure jurisdictions were prepared to handle the inevitable hiccups—there was so much engagement around it.

And the fact that, at least for me, the process was relatively smooth, considering how much had been upended by COVID-19, really stuck with me.

Mara:
What you just said about the process being smooth—that’s music to my ears. We want voting to be memorable in a positive sense. If we run into issues—casting provisional ballots, rejected mail ballots, and so on—that can really leave a sour taste. So I’m very glad to hear you had such a positive experience in 2020.

And I think this is a good moment to ask: As someone deeply involved in the world of elections, how do you see things evolving since 2020? Are you hopeful? Pessimistic? Somewhere in between? I’d love to get your perspective.

David:
Yeah, Mara, I really appreciate the question. It’s a good one—and a complex one.

I think part of me... I’ve always been a glass-half-full kind of person, and I remain hopeful about American democracy. We had people who stood up for free and fair elections in 2020 across the political spectrum, ensuring that the voices of voters were respected.

And notwithstanding the threats that persist, we’ve continued to run—by and large—free, fair, and successful elections in this country. But I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t also concerned.

My work has looked at a spectrum of autocratic threats—foreign and domestic. And we know that adversaries like Russia, Iran, and China continue to evolve their tactics, using things like AI to enhance their cyber and information operations.

Domestically, we live in an incredibly polarized time—arguably as polarized as we’ve ever been. One of the two major political parties is grappling with a substantial authoritarian threat from within. There’s just no getting around that.

Still, there are bright spots. Election administrators continue to step up. In 2022, many election deniers running for positions overseeing elections were defeated.

But we need to continue supporting good people doing good work—whether that’s election officials or researchers countering misinformation. Those folks have faced attacks that can undermine their ability to do their jobs.

I think anyone working in the election space needs to recognize that helping administer a free and fair election makes you a target for autocratic actors—those who want to take power regardless of election outcomes.

Whether you’re an elected official, an election administrator, a professor, or someone in civic engagement—you need to be mindful that stepping into this space now includes that risk.

So, to bring it back to your question: Yes, I remain hopeful—because we have good people doing good work, because of better collaboration between election officials and law enforcement, and because we’re starting to see more accountability for those who defame or attack election officials. But we’re not out of the woods.

It’s on all of us—whether that’s through legislation, protecting election workers, or recruiting and retaining the folks we need to run complex elections—to do our part.

Mara: I really appreciate you saying the thing about autocratic threats. As someone who has the remarkable experience that you do, and your years of observing and working to secure democratic systems—that's really powerful. I also appreciate you reflecting on what it means to work in the election space, because that obviously hits very close to home for me.

You put words to a lot of things I’ve been feeling, and maybe haven’t quite articulated—about the fear I sometimes have for myself and for my dear friends: professors, election officials, civil society workers—people trying to ensure democratic resilience. I know there are so many efforts to create community in these times, and that gives me great hope. This kind of community, even on a podcast, matters. The email threads, the meetings, the spaces to commiserate and connect—all of it is important. So thank you for naming that.

I'd love to talk a little more about your work observing elections. You mentioned keeping track of autocratic threats at home and abroad. Can you share a bit about what that journey has looked like for you? Any particularly memorable experiences over the course of your observation work that stand out?

David: Election observation has been critical in my career. It gives people a chance to gain new perspective—to learn best practices and lessons. When I was an election official, these missions were opportunities to build relationships and test new ideas—whether it was recruiting poll workers, testing equipment, or voter education.

I do think there’s something unique about American democracy, but no one has a monopoly on what democracy should look like. Especially now, with adversaries like Russia, China, and others trying to malign democracy, we have to demonstrate that it’s still worth aspiring to.

A few weeks ago, I returned from observing local elections in Moldova. It was a fascinating case. For context: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has massive consequences, and if they succeed, Moldova—right next door—could be next. Moldova has a pro-EU government and has been taking steps toward more democratic governance.

In the lead-up to the local elections, 36 hours before voting, Moldovan intelligence found that a political party was receiving funding from the Russian Federation. The authorities removed that party from the ballot. Now, the intelligence may have been strong, but the party didn’t have an opportunity to appeal. And as observers, we were watching that unfold in real-time.

This raises important questions. What happens when an adversary interferes in an election right before it takes place? What recourse is available? And how are election officials supposed to respond, especially with little time?

The whole thing was complex. If Moldovan authorities had not acted, and the party won significant power, that would’ve opened the door to foreign influence. But by acting, they left themselves open to criticism: "You removed us from the ballot without due process—so democracy didn’t work."

Ultimately, the election went fairly smoothly. Moldova is in accession talks with the EU, alongside Ukraine. But the country is poor, it’s facing brain drain, and it continues to face hybrid threats. Observing an election in a place striving toward democracy while under attack was an extraordinary experience.

Mara: May I ask what the mood was like at the polling places? Were you mostly observing polling places directly, or behind-the-scenes processing?

David: As a short-term observer, you’re typically on a team of two and deployed to a region. We usually see 10–12 polling places, spending 30 to 60 minutes at each. I was in a region where support for the banned party wasn’t especially strong, so my experience might differ from places where that party had more support—the Chance party.

The OSCE put out both preliminary and final reports that captured much of what we saw. There were some protest ballots, and voters asking why the party had been removed. But when you make a decision like that 36 hours before voting starts, you’re crossing out names on ballots and doing what you can to inform voters—but you won’t reach everyone.

There were a few questions where I was, but generally people noticed the cross-out and continued through the process to vote.

Mara: What you describe sounds like a zero-sum situation—a no-win scenario. On one hand, concerns about due process and whether a party can formally appeal; on the other, foreign interference. A really tough situation.

Has there been any fallout since? Any negative developments in the aftermath of the election?

David: It raises a lot of important questions. We saw something somewhat analogous in the 2020 U.S. election, when there was a spoofed message from someone claiming to be the Proud Boys, sent to mislead voters. Intelligence officials identified it quickly and disseminated accurate information. That quick response was key.

Mara: You’ve spoken a lot about election administrators, and I can’t let you go without asking about your own time in election administration. Ada County—is that correct?

David: Yes, Ada County.

Mara: Is there anything from that time that you’re especially proud of, or excited about?

David: One of the highlights was expanding mobile voting. When I worked as the county elections director, I served under Phil McGrane—he’s now Idaho’s Secretary of State. He’s a Republican and, interestingly, used to run a barbecue truck. From that experience, we developed a food truck voting process.

Most people think of mobile voting as voting trucks. When I came in, we expanded that. We reached remote areas without polling places, visited voter outreach events, and even used the truck as an emergency polling location when needed.

At the time, this was still fairly unique. We also added global early voting on Saturdays, which I believe there’s pretty wide consensus on—we need to make voting fit people’s daily lives. Saturday voting relieved Election Day pressure and gave folks more options. That was a really important step.

I also worked on elections in the City of Richmond and learned from that experience as well. Across all of these jurisdictions, the vast majority of election officials really are just trying to do the right thing. That’s what gives me hope.

And for those who feel nervous or lost—or just overwhelmed—I’d say: reach out to your local official. Volunteering as a poll worker is always a good place to start. I know that sounds like a cliché, but it’s also true.

Being in Ada County and helping expand early voting was important. But more broadly, being in local election administration helped me understand where issues lie and how to help. These days, through my research, I try to address thorny challenges—like how to prepare election officials for AI.

Mara: Yes, tell me more about that.

David: My colleague and I are working on a handbook to help state and local election officials deal with AI. We know some are already using it. AI tools are more widely available and cheaper than ever, so we want to provide guidance to help officials feel more comfortable—whether they’re adopting AI for their own work, or encountering it in the form of misinformation or falsification.

Mara: I really appreciate that narrative—starting with mobile voting and food trucks, and now addressing AI. Your career shows how technology offers both opportunities and threats.

The food truck voting reminded me of a registration event I heard about in Ohio—maybe under Secretary DeWine? I’ll have to double-check. They did a breweries-and-ballots outreach effort. I tell my students: there are tens of thousands of local election offices and 50 secretaries, it’s hard to keep track!

What I love about all this is that it points to something I’ve been thinking about a lot: the civic experience of voting. When I was growing up, going to the polls felt like an event. I don’t want to romanticize the past or suggest we shouldn’t make voting more convenient. But I do wonder—how can we preserve or recreate that sense of shared, democratic ritual?

If mobile voting takes us to community events, breweries, coffee shops—that’s really special. It makes me want to research how those experiences might recreate the civic memory of Election Day.

And that brings me to my last question, a sort of 30,000-foot view. Taking stock of your journey, your work, and your values: what does voting mean to you?

David: It might sound cliché, but voting means everything to me. It’s where democracy begins. One sign of a healthy democracy is high participation.

There’s a separate conversation about structural reforms to ensure people’s voices are reflected and amplified, but fundamentally, the way democracies—ours and others—have resisted interference is through participation.

In 2020, despite the pandemic, we saw the highest turnout in a century. That was incredible. But we also have to be honest: for far too long in this country, elections were conducted while excluding large segments of the population. And that shaped who was elected, what policies were enacted, and whose lives were affected—especially in areas like housing and civil rights.

So yes—it matters. Even in an imperfect democracy, people must stay engaged. That’s how we move forward. We improve by being informed, by staying involved.

And when people choose not to vote, that’s still a choice. It’s a win for authoritarianism. When people say, “I don’t like either candidate, so I’ll sit it out,” that’s not neutrality—it’s abstention. And that has consequences.

Voting may not be everything, but it’s foundational. Especially now—we’re at an inflection point. It’s up to all of us to do our part, whether it’s voting, being a poll worker, serving as an observer, or helping a campaign committed to democratic values.

Mara: I love what you said: voting is everything. It’s necessary, even if not sufficient. You named all the ways we can contribute to our imperfect but still vital democracy.

We can’t get around the fact that voting is at the heart of democratic governance. I have deep compassion for those who feel like their voices don’t matter—and I understand why they might feel that way.

But I always encourage folks to take small steps. Local elections don’t get enough attention in this country, yet they affect our everyday lives most directly. Small actions can and do ripple outward.

So yes—when you say voting is everything, I feel that. Every conversation like this renews my drive to gently proselytize about voting.

Thank you for bringing such passion and clarity to this conversation. It might seem like a small thing, but as we both know—it’s not.

Is there anything I didn’t ask that you’d like to reflect on, or anything I shared that you want to respond to?

David: Thank you, Mara. It’s been such a meaningful conversation.

One thing I’d add: it’s important to approach those who don’t share our views with compassion. I often think of what a rabbi once said—“Resist, and reach out.”

We need to fight for good policy and adequate funding to run elections, yes. But we also need to reach out, listen, and create space for dialogue with those who’ve been misled. They’re our neighbors, friends, and colleagues. It won’t be one conversation. It won’t be two or three. But we have to keep trying.

Empathy matters. If we don’t make space for those folks, they’ll find it elsewhere—often in dangerous places.

If we’re going to move past this era where democracy feels like it’s always on the ballot, we’ll need a cross-partisan alliance—one that transcends left and right and focuses on democratic values.

Mara: That’s such a beautiful closing thought. For those of us with deep knowledge of how democracy works—and how secure our systems actually are—it’s easy to want to shout the truth with a stick.

But we have to lead with an open hand. When something so precious is under threat, it’s hard to stay soft. But we must. We’re all complex. We’re all vulnerable to manipulation. And remembering that truth is vital.

Thank you so much, David. It’s been a pleasure.

As with all my election nerd interviews, I could talk for hours. You’ve helped me reflect on my own role, and I’m really grateful.

David: Thanks for having me, Mara.

Mara: Of course.