Editorial: The frustrating search for how best to maintain democracy in face of a health crisis

If there is ever anything like an ordinary Primary Election Day, Tuesday was surely not it.

Under the cloud of a dangerous health epidemic, thousands of judges called off at the last minute, many of them the vulnerable elderly. In Chicago and at least one suburb, polling places did not have enough staffing to open. Voting sites were changed late to limit contacts among people. The city, in particular, reported unusual levels of confusion and unusually low turnout, even for a primary.

In such circumstances, it is natural to wonder whether these problems could have been reduced, if not avoided altogether. Unfortunately, we can turn only to imprecise speculation for answers. Responding to a host of problems, officials at the Chicago Board of Elections contended they had foreseen a shortage of election judges as early as last week and appealed to the governor without success to postpone in-person voting or eliminate it altogether. The governor responded that his office had no authority to take such steps on its own and had offered the city a range of resources that it rejected, including emergency judging help and the National Guard.

"There are people out there today who want to say, 'Oh, it's a crisis bend the rules that overstep your authority.' Let me tell you this. It is exactly in times like these when the constitutional boundaries of our democracy should be respected, above all else," the Pritzker said in a statement posted at Capitol Fax. "I have a responsibility to the people of the state of Illinois to make sure that democracy survives through everything, that through everything democracy will be preserved. That through everything democracy will be venerated. And I have a responsibility to the life and safety of the people of my state to their well-being and to their health."

As Pritzker noted Sunday when he announced that the election would go on even as he was ordering the closing of bars, restaurants and other businesses there are no good solutions here, only bad ones and less bad ones.

There are, of course, really bad ones. Consider the disorder and disruption in Ohio, where a brief court battle added to middle-of-the-night confusion after the governor ordered postponement of that state's primary just hours before polls were due to open. Ohio's solution, to hope that the coronavirus spread will be controlled in time for a rescheduled primary June 2, was certainly an option for Illinois, even last week or over the weekend when voters might have been given some time to prepare. And such a delay would address concerns about whether certain voters, the elderly in particular, would choose health concerns over civic obligations and tilt the outcome of elections toward certain candidates or referendum issues.

Yet, even so, the forecasts of even our best scientists amount to little more than educated guesswork, and they, as President Donald Trump noted Monday, fear it could be as late as "June or July" before we see real relief.

And so, the in-person voting went on. We will see, perhaps as early as today, what impact that decision had on the results, and maybe we will find therein a measure of guidance for any future crisis threatening to upend an "ordinary" Election Day.