What One Election Official Wants Her Government Colleagues to Know

Tonya Wichman, elections director for Defiance County, Ohio, is catching her breath after city and township elections last week — and holding her breath about what lies ahead in 2026.

Wichman has worked in election administration since 2015. “A lot of people have left the profession here in my corner of northwest Ohio,” she says. “I have the longest tenure of anybody up here.”

She’s been in her position during a period of unprecedented challenges, from a pandemic to the spread of election skepticism. None of this has shaken her confidence in the integrity of her county’s election processes, or the results from them.

Tours of election offices are one of the best tools election officials have to resolve voter unease, by giving them firsthand exposure to the rigor with which ballots are handled and processed. Some of the most viral election controversies began with routine activity being misunderstood — or misrepresented — as a sign of misconduct. And the skepticism has not been limited to one party, though it caught fire with Republicans after the 2020 election; a recent survey of Georgia voters found that more than a third of Democrats weren’t certain their midterm election would be fair and accurate.

Voter education will be a priority in 2026 and beyond. But is it safe to assume that people who work in government know more about elections than those outside it?

In a conversation with Governing, Wichman talks about things she’d like more of her colleagues in government to understand about the details of election administration. The interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Election skepticism can gain traction if voters don’t know about all the safeguards built into election administration. What about people who work in other parts of government? Are they aware of everything you do to make sure results are accurate?

Honestly, I think unless you work in an election office, you couldn’t understand it. It’s not something that’s easy to explain.

For instance, my deputy director is from the opposite party. We can’t open doors in our office without a fob from each of our parties. There’s no way we can change things in the system, or a ballot can be changed in any way, unless a bipartisan team is sitting together.

What about the sustained increase in threats, harassment and document requests? Do people in other departments know about those kinds of stresses?

Unless you experience it, probably not.

We have a small staff. We are hyper-focused on making sure everything is accurate and tested and sealed, and that the correct information is getting out to the public. When we have a lot of extra jobs thrown in on top of what we’re already doing, we have to take time out of our process. We may have to read through lengthy public records requests and try to explain [to voters] how things are secure, for example.

No one walks out of the office alone. We make sure people are parked in a certain spot for election night. We work closely with our local law enforcement, and they’ve been great, even on Election Day, stopping in the polling locations, checking on our poll workers, making sure there are no incidents.

Would it be helpful if government officials made public statements that election results and processes are trustworthy?

That would be huge. They have a louder voice than we do. We’re the behind-the-scenes group.

We’ve invited legislators to come see our process. There are a lot of people that want hand-counted ballots. We’re being told you need to have a paper ballot, not these machines.

They don’t understand the process. We have a hybrid ballot marking machine — it marks the ballot and then it prints it out. It shows everything you voted on. It’ll tell you if you missed something.

That’s a paper ballot. Everybody in Ohio has a physical paper ballot.

If legislators really want to understand, and they’re not on the ballot, they can come work at the polls. They can come watch our public tests of our equipment, how we go through everything, every button tested, every scanner tested. We verify and verify and verify.

How does it affect election administrators when people who work in government question election integrity?

I think people have no idea how resilient election officials are. It’s a special, special, creative person that wants to do this job.

We believe in democracies. I don’t think I’ve ever heard any kid say, “I think I’m going to go into elections.” It’s something that happens. You either love it or you hate it, but you always believe in what you’re doing. Sometimes it’s love and hate at the same time during the exhaustion period.

We work with what we have. We’re used to last-minute changes. We’re used to finding a solution to everything we have, a backup to a backup to a backup on every process.

But understanding and communication are things that could change the atmosphere for everyone.

Is there anything else others in government could be more aware of, or do differently, in regard to election administration?

I spent some time in Washington, D.C., last month talking to Congress and representatives.

We were explaining why cutting federal funding to elections is going to dramatically change the way we can keep our security going. In 2018 we had a $400 million allocation [for all states]. This year’s budget had $15 million. That’s across the country.

Consistent funding that we can plan on would be huge for any election office. We’re planning out the next two elections, so knowing what we have to work with would make it a lot easier for us.

Some states allocate their federal funding in different ways. Maybe some consistency there as well, where it gets down to the local level of the people running the elections, not staying at the state level.

I would encourage legislators, when they are going to be making laws regarding elections, to set up a group of election officials to meet with. They could explain what the law might change in the process or outcome of an election that they [legislators] might not understand.