Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Elections legislation has no place in end-of-year congressional agenda

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer wants to complete his year-end agenda by Christmas.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

As Congress continues to plod its way through a series of high-profile, and in some cases critical, bills before departing Washington for the December recess, a pair of election reform bills appear to be left by the wayside.

Last week, Congress averted a government shutdown by approving a short-term spending bill and leaders are negotiating on two more legislative priorities this week: an annual defense authorization bill and a measure to prevent the United States from defaulting on its debts.

Those and other bills leave little, if any, room for Senate consideration of the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, which so far have been blocked by Republicans.


Monday morning reports on the congressional schedule detail efforts to pass the National Defense Authorization Act, which sets policy for the Pentagon each year, and an increase in the debt ceiling, a move that allows the federal government to take on more debt without resorting to extraordinary measures such as default.

Democrats are also hoping to push through the Build Back Better Act, a massive increase in social safety net spending that Republicans oppose. And the Senate GOP may force a vote on a measure to block implementation of President Biden’s vaccine mandate for private companies.

Congress is scheduled to begin the December recess on Dec. 13, leaving just a few days to complete the agenda. But few on Capitol Hill expect that schedule to hold, and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has said he wants the major legislation all completed by Christmas.

Even if they were to stay in town longer, there’s little talk of election legislation making another appearance on the Senate floor.

A coalition of more than 200 organizations advocating passage of the elections bills issued a letter Thursday calling on Congress to delay the recess so it could take up to the two measures.

“The most important step that Congress can take to protect the array of issues our organizations advocate for is to pass these vitally important voting rights bills in order to ensure that all Americans’ voices are heard in our democracy,” reads the letter, signed by members of the Declaration for American Democracy coalition and the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.

The Freedom to Vote Act is a wide-ranging collection of changes to elections, campaign finance and ethics rules. It’s the successor to the For the People Act, which was blocked this summer by Senate Republicans after passing the House. Moderate Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia negotiated changes, with hope of bringing on enough Republicans to overcome a potential filibuster, but the GOP remains united in opposition.

Similarly, the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act has been blocked by Senate Republicans after being passed by House Democrats. That bill would restore a provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that required states with a history of racial discrimination to get approval from the Justice Department before changing election laws. That provision, known as “preclearance,” was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2013.

“This legislation must be a top priority on the remaining agenda for the year, and we urge you to stay in session to do whatever it takes until these bills are passed because inaction is not an option,” the advocates wrote in their letter.

Voting rights groups have also called for Senate Democrats to abolish the filibuster or at least modify the rule so election legislation can be passed by a simple majority. But lawmakers have resisted those calls for now.


Read More

An empty grocery cart in a market.

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani proposes five city-run grocery stores. See the arguments for and against, from food deserts to bodega concerns and the $70M cost.

Getty Images, Kwangmoozaa

Government-Owned Grocery Stores: Accessible Nutrition or Government Overreach?

Issue Introduction

Over the past few years, affordability has become the most central issue affecting Americans and the quality of life in the United States. The prices of groceries and basic necessities have risen 25-30% since the COVID-19 pandemic and are projected to rise another 3.2% in 2026. At the same time, the exodus of grocery chains from rural and low-income areas has scattered food deserts throughout individual states. Recent mass closures include Grocery Outlet’s shuttering of 36 stores and continued shut-downs of many Albertsons locations. These factors have led politicians to make affordability a major campaign issue.

During his progressive campaign for mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani raised the idea of opening grocery stores owned and operated by the city government to provide New Yorkers with affordable groceries. In his April 2026 public address that marked his first 100 days in office, Mayor Mamdani announced plans for the first of five city-run grocery stores. Mamdani’s proposed initiative will use $70 million in capital funding to build five city-owned municipal stores–one in each borough–and place them under control of the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC). NYCEDC will then select third-party operating staff in accordance with city standards for affordability and proper labor practices. Public opinion following the announcement continues to be divided between uproar and support.

Keep ReadingShow less
​U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth testifies during a Senate Committee on Appropriations hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on July 21, 2026. Hegseth is crafting a strong and masculine identity for his audience as he reportedly contemplates a presidential run.

(Alex Wroblewski/AFP/Getty Images/TNS)

Politicians Can’t Just ’Give the People What They Want’

For reasons that will baffle my many detractors, I am often asked for advice about being an opinion journalist. One of my standard responses is: You have to be willing to disappoint your biggest fans.

What I mean is that if you start to see your job as telling fans what they want to hear, you risk becoming an entertainer rather than a thinker, and eventually you become a caricature. I’ve seen it happen numerous times. Patrick Buchanan was a brilliant columnist and a serious person. But over the course of his career, he listened too much to the people who said, “Go Pat, go!” and too little to friends who said, “I think that’s taking it too far.”

Keep ReadingShow less
White marble exterior of the United States Capitol, often called the Capitol Building, is the home of the United States Congress and the seat of the legislative branch of the U.S. federal government

Congress approval is at a record-low 10%. Moderation and consensus-building, not partisan theatrics, are how Washington gets problems solved.

Richard Sharrocks / Getty Images

Reclaiming the Politics of the Possible

Washington is stuck in a cycle of performative conflict. The incentives seem to reward outrage, not outcomes that last; purity tests, not problem‑solving. So it’s no surprise that after three shutdowns in less than a year, public approval of Congress collapsed to just 10 percent this spring. (Gallup, April 2026.) But the country we live in — where many middle-income families report persistent financial strain and businesses are navigating unprecedented technological upheaval — cannot be governed by theatrics. Breaking this cycle requires moderation, consensus‑building, and a cooperative approach to governance.

This is not a call for centrism as an ideology. Instead, this is a call for transformative leaders to embrace moderation as their governing strategy, recognizing that in a pluralistic country of nearly 350 million people durable solutions require broad and stable alliances. Ultimately, this is a call for the 240 million of us who are eligible to vote in November to elect consensus-builders instead of bomb-throwers, and healers instead of arsonists.

Keep ReadingShow less
Adult man holds a microphone while asking a question during a town hall meeting.

Congress ignored 90% of public support for background checks. Learn how citizen assemblies and sortition helped Ireland break gridlock and could work in the US.

SDI Productions/Getty Images

Consensus Without Power: How Sortition Could Break America's Legislative Gridlock

In April 2013, four months after the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting killed twenty children, the US Senate voted on the Manchin-Toomey Act to expand background checks and to include gun-show and internet sales of firearms. Roughly nine in ten Americans, including a majority of gun owners, supported the bill—a figure that has held steady across more than a decade of polling. It fell short of the 60-vote threshold by six votes. This was not an outlier. On complex issues, representatives often fail to translate public consensus into reality. Research shows that legislators consistently vote in line with donor and interest group preferences over constituent opinion. Before the vote, the National Rifle Association (NRA) warned every senator it would “rate” their vote on its annual rating system, and a low NRA rating could cost senators their next primary. Consequently, the bill died 54-46, and the majority of Americans watched, powerless, as their consensus was overridden by self-interested representatives.

Liberal democracies need a method to bypass electoral incentives that run counter to public opinion. One already exists: Ireland faced the same stalemate on complex issues before it instituted a process called sortition. The beauty of sortition lies in its removal of the primary pressure that misaligns representatives’ interests from public interest: reelection. Much like jury duty, citizens are randomly drawn from the population. An independent body then stratifies the pool, so the final group mirrors the country by age, gender, geography, and income. The group meets over weeks or months, hearing from experts and the public, as well as debating frequently. At the end, it issues a recommendation that parliament may then put to a referendum or pass into law.

Keep ReadingShow less