Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
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

Tensions were High as Representatives Debated Allegations Against the Southern Poverty Law Center

Members of the House Judiciary Committee during the hearing on the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Credit: Olivia Ardito

Tensions were High as Representatives Debated Allegations Against the Southern Poverty Law Center

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The House Judiciary Committee held a hearing last Wednesday examining claims that the Southern Poverty Law Center had funded the very hate groups the center aims to dismantle. Tensions were high as Republicans and Democrats fired back at each other. Noticeably absent was a representative from the center, a non-profit that since 1971 has fought for racial justice and against white supremacy.

The hearing came after the Texas Attorney General Ken Pax­ton announced last Monday that he was investigating the center. The U.S. Justice Department indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center in April for allegedly funneling money to people associated with violent extremist groups. The group has flatly rejected the accusations. While Republicans backed these claims, Democrats viewed the allegations as part of the Trump-backed efforts to hinder “DEI” and other racial justice initiatives.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump Is Protecting Insurrectionists But Not Your Kids

An analysis of gun violence, political extremism, Islamophobia, and community resilience in America after the San Diego Islamic Center shooting.

GemaIbarra / Getty Images

Trump Is Protecting Insurrectionists But Not Your Kids

Last Monday, two teenage gunmen opened fire outside the Islamic Center of San Diego, murdering three Muslim men. Unfortunately, this is the type of horror Americans have been conditioned to expect. After years of political stagnation on gun safety and ongoing hateful acts of violence, our president has signaled once again to children, to the Muslim community, and to everyone else: he does not care if you get shot.

Gun violence has been on the rise in the United States for too long. Perhaps the most harrowing consequence is that gun violence is now the leading cause of death among children. Whether from school shootings, homicides, suicides, or accidents, the gun-death rate for children is nearly five in every 100,000. In fact, the number of domestic deaths due to gun violence is about as many as U.S. military deaths in every war since World War I combined. More children have been lost to gun violence since 2020 than troops lost since 9/11. Yet even with such a striking death toll—and one affecting children no less—happening on our own soil, Vice President J.D. Vance calls it a “fact of life.

Keep ReadingShow less
The dome of the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., stands tall against a blue sky with the American flag waving proudly

Congress faces growing pressure to pass redistricting reform as lawmakers debate banning gerrymandering, independent commissions, and mid-decade map changes amid renewed national controversy over fair elections.

Getty Images, aire images

Congress's Missed Opportunities on Redistricting Reform

On April 29, Issue One posted an image on Facebook and Instagram: CONGRESS CAN FIX THIS WITH THREE SIMPLE STEPS:

  1. Establish Clear National Criteria for Fair Maps
  2. Require Independent Redistricting Commissions in Every State
  3. Ban Mid-Decade Redistricting.

Issue One added below: “… but it needs 60 Senate votes to do it.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional
beige concrete building under blue sky during daytime

Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional

The Supreme Court, in holding that partisan gerrymandering is permissible—unless it "goes too far"—stated that the argument made against this practice based on the Court's "one person, one vote" doctrine didn't work because the cases that developed that doctrine were about ensuring that each vote had an equal weight. The Court reasoned that after redistricting, each vote still has equal weight.

I would respectfully disagree. After admittedly partisan redistricting, each vote does not have an equal weight. The purpose of partisan gerrymandering is typically to create a "safe" seat—to group citizens so that the dominant political party has a clear majority of the voters. It's the transformation of a contested seat or even a seat safe for the other party into a safe seat for the party doing the redistricting.

Keep ReadingShow less