Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Prominent vote-by-mail advocate is Biden pick for Postal Service board

Amber McReynolds

Amber McReynolds' national profile has skyrocketed during the pandemic.

Amber McReynolds

The reversal of voting by mail's standing and credibility, with Donald Trump gone and Washington newly in Democratic hands, appears complete.

A symbolic capstone on the transformation — from obscure second-tier cause of democracy reformers before the pandemic, to the heart of Trump's crusade of lies about the election, and now to an established aspect of good governance — was delivered Wednesday by President Biden. He said he wanted to put Amber McReynolds, the most prominent evangelist for absentee balloting as head of the National Vote at Home Institute, on the board that oversees the Postal Service.

Assuming she is confirmed by the Senate, which seems likely given initial positive reaction to the nomination, McReynolds would bring several types of diversity to the job. She would become the only woman on the board, and also its first member with expertise about how the beleaguered USPS could become a lasting force for good in the electoral system.


Of the three Biden proposed for the board of governors, McReynolds is also the only political independent. But her tiny nonprofit advocacy group has gained outsized influence among the mainly left-leaning voting rights organizations that pushed last year to make access to the ballot box easier because of Covid-19 — and are now working to protect those gains from a barrage of Republican efforts in state capitals to roll back the rules.

Slightly more than 40 percent of all votes for president arrived in envelopes last fall — 65 million of them, tens of millions more than in previous elections, either returned by mail or put in drop boxes. The record-shattering number would surely have been higher except for two things: deficiencies in the Postal Service's ability to deliver the ballots to election offices in time to be counted, and Trump's constant false claims about the mail guaranteeing widespread election fraud.

McReynolds, who turns 42 next week, took over the fledgling Vote at Home Institute in 2018 after spending most of the previous decade as the top elections official in Denver, a time when Colorado became the first somewhat politically purple state to switch almost entirely to vote-by-mail.

But her standing in the fix-the-system world was obscure enough that, when the National Association of Nonpartisan Reformers met in Denver in December 2019, her impassioned presentation about the civic virtues of remote voting drew a smaller audience than panel discussions on money in politics or ranked-choice voting. That all changed three months later, when the pandemic took hold of the country and her organization rushed to produce a report for election officials in all 50 states detailing how they could combat the spread of disease by proactively mailing ballots to all voters and giving the option to return them in postage-paid envelopes or secure drop boxes, or with a trip to election offices or voting locations.

Biden's other nominees are Anton Hajjar, a former general counsel of the American Postal Workers Union, and Ron Stroman, who stepped down as deputy postmaster general last year. Their confirmations would mean a board with equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans, with McReynolds the partisan tie-breaker.

This could give her enormous influence over the future of the agency — starting with the fate of Postmaster General Louis DeJoy. The major Republican donor took the job last year and immediately confronted intense criticism for quick changes that prompted national mail slowdowns, and sustained skepticism that his policies were designed to make Trump's derision of voting by mail into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The criticisms have not let up. While the election was not extensively sullied by postal problems, service delays and financial woes persist. At a testy hearing Wednesday before the House Oversight and Reform Committee, DeJoy defended his stewardship and said he would press ahead with plans to raise prices and slow the mail.

The new makeup of the board could influence the efforts by Democrats in Congress to bolster the future of mail voting, including with potential federal subsidies, in time for the 2022 midterms. That effort could help counter the restrictive absentee ballot measures now moving through many GOP-run legislatures, including those of battlegrounds Georgia, Arizona and Pennsylvania.

Some leading GOP members of Congress, even those who voted to certify the Electoral College count in the face of Trump's lies about the election, are nonetheless supporting such bills.

Former Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa endorsed a measure, which the Repubican-majority General Assembly of his state cleared this week along party lines, that would reduce the days for early in-person voting, close polls earlier on Election Day and set stricter standards for using absentee ballots.

"State legislatures ought to be working on laws that will enhance the protection for mail-in ballots the same as what we have protection for voting in person," told reporters Wednesday. "In other words, the person that casts the ballot is the person that asks for it and is properly registered and property identified and somebody else isn't voting the ballot."


Read More

Nicolas Maduro’s Capture: Sovereignty Only Matters When It’s Convenient

US Capitol and South America. Nicolas Maduro’s capture is not the end of an era. It marks the opening act of a turbulent transition

AI generated

Nicolas Maduro’s Capture: Sovereignty Only Matters When It’s Convenient

The U.S. capture of Nicolás Maduro will be remembered as one of the most dramatic American interventions in Latin America in a generation. But the real story isn’t the raid itself. It’s what the raid reveals about the political imagination of the hemisphere—how quickly governments abandon the language of sovereignty when it becomes inconvenient, and how easily Washington slips back into the posture of regional enforcer.

The operation was months in the making, driven by a mix of narcotrafficking allegations, geopolitical anxiety, and the belief that Maduro’s security perimeter had finally cracked. The Justice Department’s $50 million bounty—an extraordinary price tag for a sitting head of state—signaled that the U.S. no longer viewed Maduro as a political problem to be negotiated with, but as a criminal target to be hunted.

Keep ReadingShow less
Red elephants and blue donkeys

The ACA subsidy deadline reveals how Republican paralysis and loyalty-driven leadership are hollowing out Congress’s ability to govern.

Carol Yepes

Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis

Picture a bridge with a clearly posted warning: without a routine maintenance fix, it will close. Engineers agree on the repair, but the construction crew in charge refuses to act. The problem is not that the fix is controversial or complex, but that making the repair might be seen as endorsing the bridge itself.

So, traffic keeps moving, the deadline approaches, and those responsible promise to revisit the issue “next year,” even as the risk of failure grows. The danger is that the bridge fails anyway, leaving everyone who depends on it to bear the cost of inaction.

Keep ReadingShow less
White House
A third party candidate has never won the White House, but there are two ways to examine the current political situation, writes Anderson.
DEA/M. BORCHI/Getty Images

250 Years of Presidential Scandals: From Harding’s Oil Bribes to Trump’s Criminal Conviction

During the 250 years of America’s existence, whenever a scandal involving the U.S. President occurred, the public was shocked and dismayed. When presidential scandals erupt, faith and trust in America – by its citizens as well as allies throughout the world – is lost and takes decades to redeem.

Below are several of the more prominent presidential scandals, followed by a suggestion as to how "We the People" can make America truly America again like our founding fathers so eloquently established in the constitution.

Keep ReadingShow less
Money and the American flag
Half of Americans want participatory budgeting at the local level. What's standing in the way?
SimpleImages/Getty Images

For the People, By the People — Or By the Wealthy?

When did America replace “for the people, by the people” with “for the wealthy, by the wealthy”? Wealthy donors are increasingly shaping our policies, institutions, and even the balance of power, while the American people are left as spectators, watching democracy erode before their eyes. The question is not why billionaires need wealth — they already have it. The question is why they insist on owning and controlling government — and the people.

Back in 1968, my Government teacher never spoke of powerful think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, now funded by billionaires determined to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. Yet here in 2025, these forces openly work to control the Presidency, Congress, and the Supreme Court through Project 2025. The corruption is visible everywhere. Quid pro quo and pay for play are not abstractions — they are evident in the gifts showered on Supreme Court justices.

Keep ReadingShow less