Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Pennsylvania may decide the election, but has to decide many rules first

Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf

Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf wants to speed the count by allowing processing of mail ballots before Election Day. Republicans in Harrisburg want to restrict drop boxes.

Mark Makela/Getty Images

Eighteen days from when the voting stops, no battleground state has its election procedures more up in the air than Pennsylvania.

Whether to permit an extension for the arrival of absentee ballots will be decided any day by the U.S. Supreme Court, protecting or disenfranchising tens of thousands of voters.

Whether to reject ballots for sloppy signatures will be decided any day by the state Supreme Court, determining the validity of thousands more votes.

Whether to allow processing of mailed ballots before Election Day will be decided any day at the state capital, either speeding or delaying results that could settle who wins the presidency.


And then there are the continued disputes over how expansively to permit ballot drop boxes, what to do with mistakenly duplicated vote-by-mail applications, how to recover from ballot printing mistakes, how much more to regulate poll workers — and whether discarded vote envelopes sent by Pennsylvanians in the armed forces overseas are a sign of sweeping election fraud. (The big hint here: There were nine of them, not the "thousands of ballots" President Trump falsely claimed Thursday night.)

All the indecision suggests that another round of fresh legal fights is likely to be unleashed after Nov. 3 if the national contest between Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden remains too close to call — and Pennsylvania's 20 electoral votes remain up for grabs. (State law says that's supposed to be settled with the certification of election results by Nov. 23.)

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

"I happen to think that Pennsylvania could be ground zero in the country for determining the outcome of the presidential election because of the delays from litigation," Philadelphia election lawyer Matt Haverstick told Spotlight PA. "I have a feeling we are going to be the Florida of 2020."

The most dramatic possible scenario involves competing slates of electors vying for the eye of Congress — one group backing Trump that gets forwarded by the Republican-majority General Assembly, and a group for Biden endorsed by Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf.

But that hypothetical would come true more than two months from now, and several more tangible disputes must be settled in the next two weeks.

In the meantime, a record 2.6 million Pennsylvanians have already asked for and received mail-in ballots, and 518,000 had been returned by the middle of the week. Four years ago, Trump carried the state by just 45,000 votes out of 6 million cast.

Assuming turnout is higher this year, as widely expected, the most important pending case looks to be the one before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Republicans are asking the justices to reverse a ruling by the state's high court last month, ordering a three-day extension for the arrival of absentee ballots mailed by the time the polls close Nov. 3. The state's justices also ruled 4-3 that envelopes with a missing or unclear postmark must be accepted, so long as there's no indication they were sent in after polls closed.

More than 18,000 envelopes were tossed because they arrived after primary day in June, or about 1 percent of the total vote.

Republicans say Election Day arrival should be the rule again, not only because the state court imposed its will on a decision that should have been left to legislators but also because the justices changed the rules too close to the election. Both arguments have fared well in a series of election cases the Supreme Court has considered since the coronavirus pandemic upended normal election rhythms this spring.

The state high court said this week it would decide another big dispute before Election Day: Democratic Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar, Pennsylvania's top election official, wants the court to prevent counties from rejecting ballots based on a subjective assessment of the signatures on the envelopes by election officials, who are not trained to see how handwriting can change over time. (About 1,800 primary ballots were rejected for this reason this summer.)

The Trump campaign wants to disqualify mail-in ballots with signatures that don't appear to match what's on file. A federal judge in Pittsburgh last week threw out a lawsuit to that effect, which also sought to lift the county residency rule for partisan election monitors and an effective ban on ballot drop boxes.

While Trump's team readies a federal appeal, his GOP allies in Harrisburg are pursuing his poll watcher and drop box preferences as their main objectives in negotiations over a last-minute election bill. But on Thursday the governor's office described his latest offer as having been spurned and said the talks are at an impasse.

Wolf's main goal is a change in state law to permit county election officials a head start of at least a few days to check the signatures, open the envelopes and stack the ballots for tabulating — painstaking work that right now can only begin the morning of Election Day. (Winners of some close legislative and congressional primaries were not clear for weeks afterward as a result of that late start.)

Such a switch would speed the vote count, assuring a vast majority of ballots are tabulated on election night and reducing the ability to credibly claim the results are being manipulated. At a campaign rally in Pennsylvania this week, Trump falsely asserted that the only way he could lose the state is if Democrats cheat. (Polling for now shows Biden with a single-digit lead.)

A spurt of worry about potential fraud quickly subsided Thursday but was supplanted by a wave of voter confusion.

The state reportedly rejected 372,000 requests for mail-back ballots that seemed fishy at first blush, but the cause of that enormous number turned out to be benign. More than 90 percent were duplicates — from people who failed to remember that, back when they asked to vote absentee in the primary, they checked a box to get a general election absentee ballot as well.

Even before the pandemic, the state had decided to drop strict excuse requirements on the books for years and to encourage more use of the mail — and the new system has proved baffling or worry-inducing to many, and overwhelming to local officials.

Officials in Pittsburgh, for example, were scrambling to get more than 29,000 replacement ballots to voters who had received vote-by-mail packets asking the to cast down-ballot votes for races in a different parts of the state

Only 4 percent of votes were cast by mail statewide just two years ago, but it was more than half in the primary.

Read More

Joe Biden being interviewed by Lester Holt

The day after calling on people to “lower the temperature in our politics,” President Biden resort to traditionally divisive language in an interview with NBC's Lester Holt.

YouTube screenshot

One day and 28 minutes

Breslin is the Joseph C. Palamountain Jr. Chair of Political Science at Skidmore College and author of “A Constitution for the Living: Imagining How Five Generations of Americans Would Rewrite the Nation’s Fundamental Law.”

This is the latest in “A Republic, if we can keep it,” a series to assist American citizens on the bumpy road ahead this election year. By highlighting components, principles and stories of the Constitution, Breslin hopes to remind us that the American political experiment remains, in the words of Alexander Hamilton, the “most interesting in the world.”

One day.

One single day. That’s how long it took for President Joe Biden to abandon his call to “lower the temperature in our politics” following the assassination attempt on Donald Trump. “I believe politics ought to be an arena for peaceful debate,” he implored. Not messages tinged with violent language and caustic oratory. Peaceful, dignified, respectful language.

Keep ReadingShow less

Project 2025: The Department of Labor

Hill was policy director for the Center for Humane Technology, co-founder of FairVote and political reform director at New America. You can reach him on X @StevenHill1776.

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, a right-wing blueprint for Donald Trump’s return to the White House, is an ambitious manifesto to redesign the federal government and its many administrative agencies to support and sustain neo-conservative dominance for the next decade. One of the agencies in its crosshairs is the Department of Labor, as well as its affiliated agencies, including the National Labor Relations Board, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.

Project 2025 proposes a remake of the Department of Labor in order to roll back decades of labor laws and rights amidst a nostalgic “back to the future” framing based on race, gender, religion and anti-abortion sentiment. But oddly, tucked into the corners of the document are some real nuggets of innovative and progressive thinking that propose certain labor rights which even many liberals have never dared to propose.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump on stage at the Republican National Convention

Former President Donald Trump speaks at the 2024 Republican National Convention on July 18.

J. Conrad Williams Jr.

Why Trump assassination attempt theories show lies never end

By: Michele Weldon: Weldon is an author, journalist, emerita faculty in journalism at Northwestern University and senior leader with The OpEd Project. Her latest book is “The Time We Have: Essays on Pandemic Living.”

Diamonds are forever, or at least that was the title of the 1971 James Bond movie and an even earlier 1947 advertising campaign for DeBeers jewelry. Tattoos, belief systems, truth and relationships are also supposed to last forever — that is, until they are removed, disproven, ended or disintegrate.

Lately we have questioned whether Covid really will last forever and, with it, the parallel pandemic of misinformation it spawned. The new rash of conspiracy theories and unproven proclamations about the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump signals that the plague of lies may last forever, too.

Keep ReadingShow less
Painting of people voting

"The County Election" by George Caleb Bingham

Sister democracies share an inherited flaw

Myers is executive director of the ProRep Coalition. Nickerson is executive director of Fair Vote Canada, a campaign for proportional representations (not affiliated with the U.S. reform organization FairVote.)

Among all advanced democracies, perhaps no two countries have a closer relationship — or more in common — than the United States and Canada. Our strong connection is partly due to geography: we share the longest border between any two countries and have a free trade agreement that’s made our economies reliant on one another. But our ties run much deeper than just that of friendly neighbors. As former British colonies, we’re siblings sharing a parent. And like actual siblings, whether we like it or not, we’ve inherited some of our parent’s flaws.

Keep ReadingShow less
Constitutional Convention

It's up to us to improve on what the framers gave us at the Constitutional Convention.

Hulton Archive/Getty Images

It’s our turn to form a more perfect union

Sturner is the author of “Fairness Matters,” and managing partner of Entourage Effect Capital.

This is the third entry in the “Fairness Matters” series, examining structural problems with the current political systems, critical policies issues that are going unaddressed and the state of the 2024 election.

The Preamble to the Constitution reads:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

What troubles me deeply about the politics industry today is that it feels like we have lost our grasp on those immortal words.

Keep ReadingShow less