Opinion: Concession was ‘indispensable’ to the creation of the Constitution — and it’s still indispensable to its health today

Despite losing by an unsurpassable margin, Utah gubernatorial candidate Phil Lyman has yet to concede the Republican primary election. This failure undermines the precepts upon which our Constitution was built. Acknowledging the results of elections sends an important signal about the legitimacy of the process and demonstrates commitment to country before self, politics and party.

On Sept. 17, 1787, as the Constitutional Convention wrapped up, the delegates signed their names to the Constitution. On that same day, George Washington attached a letter to the Constitution and sent it to Congress. As copies of the Constitution were sent to the various states for ratification, they were accompanied by Washington’s letter.

In that letter, Washington explained how delegates had come together to create our Constitution, which has now lasted for 236 years. The Constitution, he wrote , “is the result of a spirit of amity, and of that mutual deference and concession which the peculiarity of our political situation rendered indispensable.”

Amity. Deference. Concession.

Looking at Webster’s 1828 dictionary can give us a sense of how these terms were viewed closer to the time of the Convention. Amity refers to friendship, harmony and understanding between individuals, societies and even nations. The delegates viewed one another as friends; they were united in the support of, as the letter explains, “the consolidation of our Union, in which is involved our prosperity, felicity, safety, perhaps our national existence.” Today, many of us admire the friendships — such as those between Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia or Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Amy Coney Barrett — similarly built across partisan and ideological lines.

The other two terms are still familiar to modern ears. “Mutual deference and concession” were “indispensable” to the creation of the Constitution — and they are still indispensable to its health today. Deference refers to “a yielding in opinion; submission of judgment to the opinion or judgment of another. Hence, regard; respect.” Concession similarly refers to “the act of granting or yielding.”

The delegates at the Constitutional Convention succeeded because they were willing to defer and concede to the opinions of others. They were willing to listen to one another. For example, they were not to talk, read or even write as others spoke. They were open to persuasion. Secret proceedings and the use of a “ committee of the whole ” allowed delegates to change their votes and reassess their opinions regularly. Democracy is successful when citizens defer and concede to better ideas, new knowledge and bridge-building opportunities.

But deference and concession are vital to democracy in other ways. Democracy is weakened when, instead of upholding and building trust in our institutions, candidates refuse to accept the results of valid, fair and well-managed elections. Gubernatorial candidate Phil Lyman is currently doing this.

By refusing to respect the legitimate outcome of the primary election in Utah, he is sowing unnecessary resistance among his supporters, wasting taxpayer dollars and resources with threats of frivolous lawsuits and stoking distrust in Utah’s election process. As Lyman refuses to concede the election, he debases the very nature of democracy and subverts the constitutional powers granted to the voters of Utah.

Until recently, it was commonplace for candidates to concede their races in a timely manner. Since the beginning of the formal “concession” in 1896 until our most recent presidential election in 2020, all presidential nominees from the major political parties have conceded. And yielding to the election process is powerful. The late Sen. John McCain’s concession speech after losing the presidential election to former President Barack Obama in 2008 is widely recognized for having brought the country together. He said, “I urge all Americans who supported me to join me in not just congratulating him, but offering our next president our goodwill and earnest effort to find ways to come together, to find the necessary compromises, to bridge our differences and help restore our prosperity, defend our security in a dangerous world, and leave our children and grandchildren a stronger, better country than we inherited.”

In the rare event that irregularities in the election process arise, candidates can in good faith seek redress through the legal process. Still, during the 2000 presidential election, then-Vice President Al Gore conceded once the Supreme Court ruled to stop the vote count in Florida. At the time, he said , “Let there be no doubt. While I strongly disagree with the court’s decision, I accept it. I accept the finality of this outcome.” He went on to quote Stephen Douglas, who lost to Abraham Lincoln, stating : “Partisan feeling must yield to patriotism. I’m with you Mr. President, and God bless you.” Such a concession helped the country move forward during a time of conflict and crisis.

It is imperative for candidates like Lyman to demonstrate respect for our electoral system. Conceding graciously, accompanied by a statement affirming the election’s legitimacy, would not only uphold democratic norms but also strengthen trust in the robust security of our Utah electoral processes. It is a crucial step toward fostering unity and acceptance of election outcomes, regardless of individual preferences or party affiliations.

Melarie Wheat is co-coordinator for the Utah chapter of Mormon Women for Ethical Government . A graduate of BYU, she is a former homeless services caseworker turned mostly stay-at-home mom to five young children.

Lisa R. Halverson is the director of advocacy research for Mormon Women for Ethical Government . She works at Utah Valley University’s Center for Constitutional Studies as a civics education research fellow.