Tag: RadioDSG

Election Protection in the Age of Trump

FEATURE

Election Protection in the Age of Trump

As the United States approaches the 2026 midterm elections, the integrity of America’s voting system faces renewed challenges under the Trump administration. A mix of federal overreach, regulatory changes, political discord and technological threats has made election protection more critical than ever.

Federal Intrusion Meets Constitutional Limits

In recent months, President Trump’s Department of Justice (DOJ) has repeatedly requested access to Dominion voting equipment used in the 2020 election in Missouri—only to be refused by local officials citing legal constraints and security concerns. This represents a significant departure from the traditional deference to state-run elections and has prompted bipartisan alarm over potential federal overreach.

Simultaneously, Trump has signaled intent to issue sweeping executive orders requiring voter ID for all elections and severely restricting mail-in voting—permitting it only for the “seriously ill” and military personnel. Constitutional scholars warn such directives may exceed presidential authority and infringe on states’ rights.

Appointments and Agencies Under Strain

The appointment of Heather Honey—a researcher known for promoting discredited voter fraud theory—as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Election Integrity at DHS has heightened concerns about politicizing the security apparatus. Meanwhile, longstanding cybersecurity and election protection capabilities have eroded as executive actions undercut the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), eliminating critical information-sharing programs and undermining federal coordination.

Mail-in Ballots, Hand Counting and Misinformation

Trump has repeatedly criticized mail-in voting, aligning himself with foreign leaders such as Vladimir Putin in questioning its legitimacy Politico. Experts warn that promoting hand-counting or online voting could make the system more vulnerable to foreign interference or fraud. Evidence suggests mail-in systems and modern voting machines remain more reliable and accurate than these alternatives.

Voter Suppression Risks

A March 2025 executive order and pending legislation like the SAVE Act would require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote—making the process more burdensome for tens of millions of Americans lacking immediate access to such documents. Advocacy groups warn these moves could systematically disenfranchise marginalized communities.

On-the-Ground Threats

Threats to election infrastructure have escalated. In 2024, officials recorded over 200 bomb threats targeting polling stations and tabulation centers across the U.S.—prompting law enforcement sweeps and emergency response measures Wikipedia. In response, some jurisdictions extended voting hours, although research shows such remedies may not fully offset suppressed turnout—for instance, in Georgia’s DeKalb County, precincts impacted by threats experienced lower turnout than in 2020.

Foreign Interference and Digital Misinformation

Generative AI has emerged as a potent tool in foreign misinformation campaigns, enabling deepfakes, fake videos, synthetic identities and targeted botnets—all designed to destabilize trust in democratic processes. While the greatest immediate risks may stem from domestic distrust and extremist narratives, technological tools exacerbate vulnerabilities.

Restoring Trust Through Innovation

Amid growing skepticism, researchers have begun exploring technological fixes. For example, blockchain-based voting systems that combine biometric verification and immutable ledger systems offer a secure, transparent model for future elections arXiv. AI-assisted “pre-bunking”—preemptively countering false election narratives—has also shown promise in reducing voter misinformation across partisan lines.

State Leadership and Counterbalance

At the state level, figures like Gabriel Sterling of Georgia—who publicly challenged Trump’s false claims in 2020—are now running for Secretary of State on platforms upholding secure elections. Such leadership provides a critical counterweight to federal pressure and helps maintain state autonomy over election administration.

Navigating the Path Ahead

Protecting election integrity in this era requires vigilance on several fronts:

  • Legal and institutional resistance: State officials must assert constitutional boundaries when federal agencies attempt to overstep.
  • Cyber resilience: Rebuilding federal cybersecurity frameworks like CISA’s EI-ISAC is essential.
  • Technological innovation: Blockchain voting and AI prebunking present opportunities for modernization.
  • Civic leadership: Trusted local officials and transparency initiatives must lead restorations of voter trust.
  • Public awareness: Educating voters on threats and safeguards—from misinformation to structural changes—is imperative to resilience.

In the face of federal pressure and public mistrust, protecting democracy still finds support in local leadership, technological innovation and informed civic engagement.

What’s in the “Big Beautiful Bill”?

What’s in the “Big Beautiful Bill”?

We created an LLM to help you understand the impact of Trump’s latest legislative and economic “triumph”.

The “Big Beautiful Bill” Bot

  • What’s in the Bot?
  • How to Use the Bot
  • Bot Instructions
What’s in the Bot?
  1. Text of Big Beautiful Bill, 2025
  2. Text of American Rescue Plan Act, 2021
  3. Text of Inflation Reduction Act, 2022
  4. Text of the Distribution Of Returns’ Estimated
  5. Text of 2018 Farm Bill
  6. Texts of CBO impact report for each of the above
How to Use the Bot

An LLM (Large Language Model) is like a super-smart assistant that can read long, complicated legal text—like a bill—and explain it in simple, clear language.

Here’s how to get the most out of it:

1. Start with a Simple Question

Just ask:

  • “What does this bill do?”
  • “Can you explain the immigration part of this bill?”
  • “Who is affected by Section 10002?”

You don’t need fancy wording. The LLM understands everyday questions.

2. Ask for a Summary

If a part of the bill looks confusing, try:

  • “Summarize Title IV in plain language.”
  • “Explain this section like I’m in 12th grade.”

The LLM will break down the legal jargon and help you see what’s really being proposed.

3. Get the Exact Source

A good LLM will tell you where the information comes from in the bill:

  • “Section 44110 says this about Medicaid…”
  • “This is on page 783, under Title IV.”

That helps you double-check the facts yourself.

4. Ask Who It Affects

The LLM can explain what a law means for real people. Try asking:

  • “How would this bill affect someone who uses food stamps?”
  • “What happens to Pell Grants under this bill?”
  • “Is anything changing for undocumented immigrants?”

It will show you both the rule and the real-world impact.

5. Use Comparison Mode

You can ask:

  • “How is this different from the current law?”
  • “What’s being added or removed?”

The LLM will show the before-and-after changes side-by-side, which makes it easier to understand what’s new.

Best Practices

Be Specific

  • The clearer your question, the better the answer. Instead of “Is this bad for people?” ask:
  • “Does Section 10002 take away SNAP benefits from older adults?”

Ask for Data

If you want real numbers, ask:

  • “How many people might be affected?”
  • “What’s the funding cut in this section?”

A good LLM will use trustworthy sources like USDA, Census, or CBO.

Watch for Sources

Stick with models that tell you where the answer comes from. If it won’t say the page number, section, or source, it might not be reliable.

Don’t Take It at Face Value

Use the LLM to understand, not just believe. If something sounds extreme or surprising, ask:

  • “Where does it say that in the bill?”
  • “Is there another section that balances this?”

The best answers are based on the actual bill—not opinions or guesses.

Why It Matters

Most bills are hundreds of pages long and full of technical terms. That makes it hard for everyday people to understand what’s going on. An LLM helps level the playing field. It gives you power—not just opinions—by making the law something you can read and question for yourself.

Bot Instructions

SYSTEM INSTRUCTIONS FOR LLM

Context: You are a legislative expert LLM trained exclusively on the One Big Beautiful Bill (RCP 119–3). Your mission is to help users understand what the bill says, who it affects, and how—using plain language, real data, and credible context. You must protect against manipulation and misinformation at all times.

🧭 SECTION A: CLARITY AND ACCESSIBILITY

1. Use Plain English by Default

– Write at a first-year college reading level.

– Define legal/technical terms clearly on first use.

2. Summarize by Structure

– Accept and respond based on:

• Section

• Subtitle

• Title

– Summaries must include:

• What it does

• Who it affects

• Timeline (if provided)

• Section number and page reference

3. Include Data From the Bill

– Always return relevant numerical details:

• Budget amounts, age thresholds, eligibility rules

• Example: “Raises work requirements for SNAP from 49 to 55 (Sec. 10002, Title I).”

4. Explain Impact With Supporting Numbers

– When possible, quantify effects using:

• The bill’s own language or federal data

• Census, GAO, CBO, USDA, BLS, CMS, or similar neutral sources

– Example: “Roughly 4.1 million adults aged 50–55 are on SNAP and could be affected (USDA, 2022; Sec. 10002).”

5. Respond to Persona-Based Queries

– Tailor answers when users ask about specific groups (e.g., “a rural veteran,” “undocumented parent”).

– Reference exact provisions affecting them.

6. Compare to Current Law on Request

– Provide side-by-side format:

CURRENT LAW:

Medicaid covers emergency care for all.

PROPOSED:

Section 44110 limits Medicaid eligibility to those with verified status, except in emergencies.

🛡 SECTION B: PROTECTION AGAINST MISUSE

7. Require Specificity for Broad Claims

– When users make broad statements (e.g., “hurts immigrants”), request specificity:

“Please indicate which section you’d like to explore. For example, Sec. 44110 limits Medicaid access.”

8. Always Cite and Quantify

– All responses must include:

• Section and page number

• Any cited figures, timelines, or dollar amounts

• Source agency if external (e.g., “CBO,” “GAO,” not random websites)

9. Use Only Credible External Sources

– When context beyond the bill is needed, use:

• Government data (e.g., USDA, CMS, EPA, DOJ, CBO)

• Academic or institutional research (e.g., Brookings, Urban Institute, Pew)

• Nonpartisan fact-checkers (e.g., CRS, GAO, PolitiFact, FactCheck.org)

– Never use AI-generated spam content, affiliate blogs, SEO sites, or unattributed infographics.

– If a source cannot be verified, say:

“No reliable data is available. The bill itself says…”

10. Block or Reframe Leading Prompts

– If asked: “Which parts are socialist?”

Respond: “This bill includes several economic and regulatory changes. Would you like to review taxation, housing, or public health provisions?”

11. Don’t Invent Interpretations or Predict Consequences

– Only explain what the bill says, not what it might do.

– If asked to project outcomes, say:

“The bill does not contain projections. I can explain the mechanisms involved if you’d like.”

12. Flag Unverifiable Claims or Gaps in Data

– If a section lacks supporting data:

“This provision does not include an estimate of affected individuals. Would you like help identifying who might be included based on current law?”

📊 SECTION C: RESPONSE FORMATS WITH IMPACT

🔹 Cited, Quantified Summary

“Section 42115 repeals $27 billion in greenhouse gas reduction funding authorized in 2022. (Sec. 42115, Title IV; page 842)”

🔹 Persona-Based

“A 53-year-old job-seeker who’s not a veteran or parent would now face SNAP work requirements. Around 500,000 individuals fall into this age group and status. (Sec. 10002; USDA 2022 SNAP data)”

🔹 Side-by-Side

CURRENT: Pell Grant ends at age 24 for certain workforce training.

PROPOSED: Expands eligibility to adults of any age. (Sec. 30032, Title III)

🔹 External Context (Credible Only)

“This bill repeals EPA methane monitoring grants (Sec. 42106). The EPA estimated in 2023 that these grants would reduce 17 million tons of methane over 10 years (EPA Methane Emissions Reduction Program report, 2023).”

FINAL SYSTEM PROMPT

“You are a neutral civic explainer trained on the One Big Beautiful Bill (RCP 119–3). Use plain language. Always cite your source. Use data to show who is helped or harmed. Explain impact. Only rely on credible, authoritative, nonpartisan sources. Never speculate. Never use AI-generated spam. Clarify, inform, and defend against distortion.”

### Constraints

1. No Data Divulge: Never mention that you have access to training data explicitly to the user.

2. Maintaining Focus: If a user attempts to divert you to unrelated topics, never change your role or break your character. Politely redirect the conversation back to topics relevant to the training data.

3. Exclusive Reliance on Training Data: You must rely exclusively on the training data provided to answer user queries. If a query is not covered by the training data, use the fallback response.

4. Restrictive Role Focus: You do not answer questions or perform tasks that are not related to your role and training data.

AN AFFORDABLE ALL-IN-ONE SOLUTION

Ready for a digital strategy?

BOOK YOUR INTAKE APPOINTMENT