As ‘Moscow Mitch’ Rings in His Ears, McConnell Backs Election Security

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/20/opinion/mitch-mcconnell-election-security.html

Version 0 of 1.

We come to praise Mitch McConnell, not to bury him.

On Thursday, the Senate Appropriations Committee unanimously approved a bipartisan spending package containing $250 million to help states safeguard voting systems. Among the co-sponsors was the majority leader, Mr. McConnell, who, in a floor speech before the committee’s vote, declared himself “proud” to support the measure.

To say this was a welcome surprise would be an understatement. Mr. McConnell has spent the past year-plus blocking multiple bipartisan proposals for election security. This despite warnings from the intelligence community and others that American elections remain vulnerable to outside interference. In his testimony before Congress on Russia’s meddling in the 2016 presidential race, Robert Mueller, the former special counsel, stressed that Russia was still “doing it as we sit here” even as other foreign actors were poised to do the same.

In the wake of Mr. Mueller’s testimony, critics cranked up the pressure on Mr. McConnell, mocking him as a “Russian asset” and dubbing him “Moscow Mitch.” Social media went wild for the nickname. The ordinarily impervious Mr. McConnell, who is up for re-election next year, was not amused and proclaimed himself a victim of modern-day McCarthyism.

Mr. McConnell’s team says he’s on board with this new plan because it gives money directly to the states, with few strings attached. Others see that as a problem.

“This amendment doesn’t even require the funding be spent on election security,” said Senator Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat. “Giving states taxpayer money to buy hackable, paperless machines or systems with poor cybersecurity is a waste.”

The majority leader’s aides contend that his support for the funding is not a flip-flop, since the Senate provided for $380 million for election security in its funding bill for fiscal year 2018. This argument would be more convincing if Mr. McConnell hadn’t, on multiple occasions, said the $380 million was enough and that further funding would be a waste.

Whatever the impetus, the crack in the majority leader’s stonewalling is cause for, if not celebration, at least modest cheer. Senate negotiators will now work to reconcile their bill with the House’s version, which provides a more generous $600 million with stricter conditions.

That said, more needs to be done. Democrats are pushing for broader reforms, bipartisan and otherwise.

Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado, a Democratic candidate for president, tweeted that Mr. McConnell needed to take up bills to “Strengthen election audits, Adopt paper ballots, Toughen disclosure on social media & Require campaigns to report contact w/ foreign officials trying to interfere.”

Mr. McConnell seems unlikely to embrace these more centralized reforms — though, if the “Moscow Mitch” line starts to stick with voters back home in Kentucky, then who’s to say.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.