From Chief Executive Officer and Chief Innovation Officer, Krystel Reid Heath, MSW

The 2026 midterm elections may still be months away, but for executive leaders, preparation should already be underway.

Over the past two weeks, the political landscape has shifted rapidly. Following the passing of Senator Lindsey Graham, South Carolina entered a compressed special election process to fill one of its United States Senate seats. The filing period is now underway, and candidates have begun entering the race. President Trump recently addressed the nation, renewing his call for passage of the SAVE Act and emphasizing election integrity as a central policy priority. Today, the Democratic National Committee announced its intention to preserve South Carolina's position as the first presidential primary state in the 2028 Democratic nomination process.

Viewed independently, each of these developments represents another political headline. Viewed collectively, they demonstrate something much more significant. South Carolina is once again becoming a focal point for national political, legislative, and electoral developments. At the same time, Congress continues navigating another appropriations cycle while organizations across the country begin planning for the next fiscal year and preparing for the 2026 midterm elections. For executive leaders, these developments are not simply political events. They represent changes that may influence funding priorities, legislative agendas, regulatory direction, stakeholder expectations, and the broader operating environment over the next twelve to eighteen months.

Understanding the Current Conversation

Regardless of political affiliation, every eligible American has a fundamental right to participate in free, fair, secure, and accessible elections. Public confidence in the electoral process remains essential to democratic governance and the institutions that serve our communities.

During his recent address, President Trump asserted that election integrity remains one of the nation's most pressing challenges and renewed his call for Congress to pass the SAVE Act. The legislation would establish additional federal requirements related to voter registration for federal elections, including documentary proof of citizenship. Supporters argue the legislation strengthens election integrity. Opponents argue it may create additional barriers for some eligible voters. Congress will ultimately determine the legislation's future.

Regardless of the legislation's outcome, the national conversation surrounding election administration has intensified. Organizations should anticipate that election policy, voting access, and public confidence in elections will remain prominent issues throughout the 2026 midterm cycle.

A Perspective from Inside the Process

My perspective is informed by experience from multiple vantage points within the electoral process.

I recently served as an election official during South Carolina's two most recent elections. That experience gave me firsthand insight into the procedures, documentation requirements, chain-of-custody protocols, nonpartisan oversight, and administrative safeguards that support election administration.

Throughout both elections, my responsibility was straightforward: verify each voter's eligibility under state law and help ensure every qualified voter had the opportunity to cast a ballot. When a discrepancy arose, whether someone appeared at the wrong precinct, there was a question regarding voter registration, or another issue required review, we followed established procedures to resolve the matter whenever possible. When immediate resolution was not possible, voters retained the right to cast a provisional ballot so their eligibility could be reviewed through the established process.

Like any complex governmental system, election administration can always be improved. That observation should not be controversial. What stood out to me most, however, was the professionalism and commitment of the election officials serving alongside me. Every decision was guided by the same objective: administer the law consistently and help ensure every qualified voter had the opportunity to participate. Political affiliation, race, ideology, or personal views never entered that process. Our responsibility was to the integrity of the election and the faithful administration of the law.

Earlier and mid-way through my career, I served in senior roles on local, state, and presidential political campaigns. Throughout those campaigns, I routinely purchased and analyzed voter data to support voter outreach, volunteer recruitment, communications, and targeting strategies.

This distinction is important.

The lawful acquisition and use of voter registration data has been a longstanding and widely accepted practice in American politics. Political campaigns, political parties, advocacy organizations, and other authorized entities routinely obtain voter registration information through established legal processes governed by state law. Simply accessing or utilizing voter registration data for authorized purposes does not constitute unlawful access or election interference.

As public debate continues, executive leaders should distinguish between verified facts, legal requirements, established election practices, and political rhetoric. Effective leadership depends upon understanding those differences.

Executive Insights

While public attention often centers on campaigns and candidates, executive leaders should be asking a different question.

How could the evolving political environment affect my organization over the next twelve to eighteen months?

For organizations operating in child welfare, affordable housing, human services, healthcare, education, community development, and other mission-driven sectors, elections influence far more than elected offices.

They shape legislative priorities.

They influence federal appropriations.

They affect agency leadership.

They alter regulatory agendas.

They reshape congressional committee leadership and oversight priorities.

They influence stakeholder expectations.

They redefine opportunities for advocacy and collaboration.

These changes begin long before Election Day.

The developments unfolding in South Carolina illustrate this reality. Senator Graham's passing initiated a compressed special election while simultaneously creating an institutional transition within the United States Senate. As with any statewide election, the outcome will be influenced by numerous factors, including candidate quality, campaign organization, fundraising, endorsements, independent expenditures, voter outreach, media coverage, and ultimately the decisions of South Carolina's voters. While the election will determine who succeeds Senator Graham, the broader implications extend well beyond a single office. Equally important are the committee assignments, legislative priorities, institutional relationships, and policymaking influence that accompany that seat.

Concurrently, Congress continues navigating another appropriations cycle while election policy remains at the forefront of national discussion. Each development introduces additional uncertainty for organizations whose operations depend upon federal funding, legislative action, or regulatory implementation.

Executive leaders should already be asking several strategic questions.

• How dependent is our organization on federal appropriations or discretionary grant funding?

• What legislative priorities could significantly affect our mission or the communities we serve?

• How might changes in congressional leadership influence future policy or funding decisions?

• Have we identified the policy scenarios most likely to affect our organization during the next year?

• Does our board understand these potential risks and opportunities?

Organizations that begin these conversations today will be better positioned to navigate whatever outcomes emerge following the 2026 midterm elections.

Executive Advisory

Throughout my career, I have learned that the greatest value I can provide executive leaders is not simply interpreting legislation, regulations, or political developments. It is helping leaders understand what those developments mean for executive decision-making before they become operational challenges.

Political transitions, election cycles, appropriations decisions, and regulatory changes rarely affect organizations overnight. Their implications emerge over time through shifts in funding priorities, governance expectations, agency leadership, legislative agendas, and stakeholder relationships. Executive leadership requires more than monitoring these developments. It requires understanding how they may affect an organization's mission, operations, governance, and long-term resilience while there is still time to evaluate options and act strategically.

The Strata Executive Response System™ was developed to strengthen that executive capacity. Through structured executive intelligence, legislative analysis, strategic response frameworks, and decision-support resources, Strata equips executive leaders of mission-driven organizations to anticipate legislative, governance, funding, and operational disruption before it becomes organizational crisis.

The most effective executive decisions are rarely made after uncertainty has passed.

They are made while the landscape is still changing.