Another opportunity to choose skepticism over cynicism

Charges of voter fraud against an elected official would be a significant news story at any time. In today’s politically fraught environment, such stories attract special attention.

The first conclusion they suggest is that, yes, fraud happens.

The natural immediate follow-up also must be considered, though: Perpetrators get caught.

Cynics intent on finding any excuse to justify a belief that the election system in America, or in Illinois specifically, is irretrievably corrupt will seize every opportunity to argue that a given arrest is merely an isolated example of a deeper problem, because it is certainly possible that some offenders do not get caught.

More circumspect observers, however, will acknowledge the possibility of serious fraud, but withhold a firm judgment until they can make a broader analysis beyond a single case.

These are thoughts that immediately came to mind as I read our Charles Keeshan’s story about charges filed Wednesday against a Waukegan alderperson accused of filling out and submitting the absentee ballot of her deceased mother during primary voting in April. The mere fact that Sylvia Sims Bolton is an elected official elevates the prominence of her case, but that too will be evaluated broadly by judicious readers.

When one elected official is charged with a crime, it does not logically follow that every elected official is a criminal, nor that most are nor even that many are. All such events must be evaluated in context.

That caution extends to a wide array of stories that appear in print from time to time. Occasionally, treasurers of local clubs or organizations get pinched for siphoning resources for their personal use. Individual police officers get disciplined or charged with a variety of misbehaviors. Doctors are sometimes arrested on charges of issuing fraudulent bills to Medicare and Medicaid. Company officials in positions of trust are sometimes found to be abusing their positions — and, yes, as in the Madigan-ComEd case, sometimes egregiously so.

But stories like these need to be evaluated on their own terms. They point to issues that deserve attention; they do not cast doubt on every person in a particular field or occupation. Indeed, it is often their rarity that makes these cases news in the first place.

Of course, the same reasoning must apply in other ways. The fact that one would-be instance of voter fraud was discovered and halted does not guarantee that every such instance has been or will be identified.

But it can provide an opportunity to identify and evaluate the systems in place for protecting financial systems, operational rules or, in the specific Waukegan case, election security.

Ultimately, it all redounds to a distinction I frequently make between cynicism and skepticism. Thankfully, we as a society have enough skepticism and understanding of human nature to realize that fraud of all kinds can occur, and we implement systems to identify such cases and penalize perpetrators sufficiently to deter others. But if we succumb to cynicism and conclude that all politicians are crooks, that all doctors are scamming the government, that all police officers are violating people’s rights, that all companies are gouging consumers, that no election can be trusted, we create a dark world, a world that not only is dismal to live in but also cannot be reformed.

Keep this distinction in mind when you read and hear news stories, however tempting it may be to make broad implications based on isolated circumstances.

• Jim Slusher, jslusher@dailyherald.com, is managing editor for opinion at the Daily Herald. Follow him on Facebook at www.facebook.com/jim.slusher1 and on X at @JimSlusher. His book “To Nudge The World: Conversations, community and the role of the local newspaper” is available at eckhartzpress.com.