The U.S. election system is significantly influenced by county administrators who manage the operational aspects of elections, rather than by the candidates or political parties. A network of nonpartisan non-governmental organizations (NGOs) has emerged, providing resources and training that help these administrators navigate complex election processes. This phenomenon, referred to as bureaucratic capture, highlights how NGOs can shape election outcomes by offering what appears to be neutral assistance.

These NGOs present training sessions that emphasize 'best practices' and 'evidence-based methods,' which can lead election officials to adopt their recommendations without fully understanding the implications. The volume of materials provided by these organizations can overwhelm local election offices, making their guidance seem essential for effective administration. As a result, state election directors often rely on external expertise to avoid the risks associated with litigation and to ensure compliance with evolving standards.

The influence of these NGOs extends beyond mere guidance; they also provide legal support when their recommendations are challenged. This creates a feedback loop where the policies they advocate become entrenched as 'best practices' within the administrative framework. Decisions made by unelected officials, such as how to handle ballot discrepancies or the acceptance of provisional ballots, can significantly impact voter turnout and public trust in the electoral process.

The underlying struggle for election integrity is not solely between political parties and activist groups but also involves the administrative decisions made by these trained clerks. The bureaucratic nature of this influence often obscures the power dynamics at play, as changes to election procedures are framed as modernization or compliance rather than as a shift in power.

Ultimately, the training provided by NGOs allows them to exert influence over election administration without appearing to engage in overt political maneuvering. This process illustrates how power can be exercised subtly, reshaping the electoral landscape while maintaining the facade of neutrality and professionalism.