Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Democrats revive election reform with compromise bill, but filibuster still looms

Amy Klobuchar

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, one of the lead sponsors of the Freedom to Vote Act, takes notes during a field hearing on voting rights in Atlanta.

Elijah Nouvelage/Getty Images

After the For the People Act was blocked by a Republican filibuster in June, Senate Democrats began forging a new path forward for their voting and election reform priorities.

Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Joe Manchin of West Virginia, along with six other co-sponsors, unveiled Tuesday their compromise legislation, dubbed the Freedom to Vote Act. This pared-down bill includes many provisions from the For the People Act, while also incorporating earlier proposals from Manchin, who was the sole Democrat opposed to S. 1, as the original bill is also known.

With Manchin on board, this new election reform package will likely garner support from all 50 Democrats. However, without at least 10 Republican votes or a change in Senate rules, the legislation will face the same fate as the For the People Act.


Majority Leader Chuck Schumer tasked Klobuchar and Manchin, as well as Sens. Tim Kaine of Virginia, Angus King of Maine, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Alex Padilla of California, Jon Tester of Montana and Raphael Warnock of Georgia, with workshopping election reform proposals and developing a compromise bill. (King is formally an independent but works alongside Democrats.)

At 592 pages, the Freedom to Vote Act is nearly 300-pages shorter than the For the People Act, but still includes many provisions that expand access to voter registration, bolster transparency around spending in elections and curb partisan gerrymandering.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

One key addition is a set of guidelines for states that require voters to show identification when casting a ballot in person, which Manchin had proposed in June. A broad range of IDs would be accepted, including a driver's license, state or government-issued ID, tribal ID, passport, student ID, military ID, gun license, Medicare or Social Security card, birth certificate, voter registration card, hunting or fishing license, debit card, recent utility bill or another identifying document.

"The freedom to vote is fundamental to all of our freedoms," Klobuchar said. "Following the 2020 elections in which more Americans voted than ever before, we have seen unprecedented attacks on our democracy in states across the country. These attacks demand an immediate federal response."

The group of Senate Democrats behind the bill say it will establish national standards for election administration and voting rights, ensuring all Americans can cast a ballot in a safe and secure manner.

"As elected officials, we also have an obligation to restore peoples' faith in our democracy," Manchin said, "and I believe that the commonsense provisions in this bill — like flexible voter ID requirements — will do just that."

One of the biggest items excised from the original bill was the requirement that states establish independent commissions to handle redistricting. Those would be optional under this legislation.

What's in the Freedom to Vote Act

The new package has three sections: voter access and election administration, election integrity, and civic participation and empowerment.

The voter access and election administration provisions include:

  • Setting minimum standards for states that require people to present identification to vote in person, including accepting a broad variety of ID cards and documents in hard copy and digital form.
  • Enacting automatic voter registration in each state through motor vehicle agencies.
  • Enacting online voter registration in each state.
  • Ensuring all states offer same-day voter registration at a limited number of voting sites for the 2022 elections, and then all polling locations by the 2024 elections.
  • Making Election Day a public holiday.
  • Mandating states provide at least 15 days of early voting, including two weekends, for federal elections.
  • Establishing minimum standards for mail voting and drop box access.
  • Strengthening standards for voter roll maintenance.
  • Requiring provisional ballots to count for all eligible races within a county, regardless of the precinct in which they were cast.
  • Restoring, to people who have completed their sentences for felony convictions, the right to vote in federal elections.
  • Expanding voter access for disabled individuals, Native Americans, military and civilian overseas voters, and other underserved communities.

The election integrity provisions include:

  • Protecting nonpartisan state and local election officials from inappropriate partisan interference or control.
  • Bolstering security around federal election records and election infrastructure.
  • Requiring states to use voting systems with paper ballots that can be verified in post-election audits. (States would be given grants to purchase new equipment and make other cybersecurity improvements.)
  • Tasking the Election Assistance Commission with recruiting and training election workers.
  • Establishing cybersecurity standards for voting equipment vendors.
  • Mandating federal campaigns disclose certain foreign contacts to prevent election interference.

The civic participation and empowerment provisions include:

  • Requiring states to abide by specific rules for congressional redistricting to curb partisan gerrymandering. States would be able to choose how to develop their election maps, with an independent redistricting commission among the options.
  • Mandating super PACs, political advocacy nonprofits and other organizations that spend money in elections disclose their donors. The transfer of money between groups to hide the source of funding would be banned. Also, online political advertising would be subject to the same "paid for by" disclosure requirements that apply to TV, radio and print ads.
  • Establishing a fund for states to invest in election and democracy reforms. (The fund would be financed through "an additional assessment paid on federal fines, penalties and settlements for certain tax crimes and corporate malfeasance.")
  • Improving the ability of the Federal Election Commission to oversee and enforce federal election law.
  • Creating a "coordinated spender" category to prevent single-candidate super PACs from illegally operating as an extension of a political campaign.

How democracy reform advocates are reacting

Democracy reform advocates, who have been pushing for congressional action on electoral reform for years, are hopeful this revised legislation can finally cross the finish line.

Michael Waldman, president of the Brennan Center for Justice, said the bill is "very strong" and "gives powerful new momentum to the fight to protect democracy."

Jana Morgan, director of the Declaration for American Democracy, called it "a transformative bill that will bring us closer to a democracy that is truly of, by and for the people." DFAD is a coalition of more than 230 advocacy organizations.

Given the wave of state laws tightening the rules for voter access and the redrawing of state and congressional election maps, reform advocates also emphasized the urgency of passing this federal legislation. They recognized, however, that the filibuster remains an impediment if Republicans do not get on board with these proposed reforms.

"If Republicans continue to stonewall desperately needed measures to protect our democracy, then Democrats must move immediately to adopt a workaround to the filibuster," said Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen. "America can wait no longer. The stakes are too high. Whatever institutional interest there may be in preserving the filibuster must give way to the imperative of protecting, preserving and advancing our democracy."

Read More

Podcast: How do police feel about gun control?

Podcast: How do police feel about gun control?

Jesus "Eddie" Campa, former Chief Deputy of the El Paso County Sheriff's Department and former Chief of Police for Marshall Texas, discusses the recent school shooting in Uvalde and how loose restrictions on gun ownership complicate the lives of law enforcement on this episode of YDHTY.

Listen now

Podcast: Why conspiracy theories thrive in both democracies and autocracies

Podcast: Why conspiracy theories thrive in both democracies and autocracies

There's something natural and organic about perceiving that the people in power are out to advance their own interests. It's in part because it’s often true. Governments actually do keep secrets from the public. Politicians engage in scandals. There often is corruption at high levels. So, we don't want citizens in a democracy to be too trusting of their politicians. It's healthy to be skeptical of the state and its real abuses and tendencies towards secrecy. The danger is when this distrust gets redirected, not toward the state, but targets innocent people who are not actually responsible for people's problems.

On this episode of "Democracy Paradox" Scott Radnitz explains why conspiracy theories thrive in both democracies and autocracies.

Your Take:  The Price of Freedom

Your Take: The Price of Freedom

Our question about the price of freedom received a light response. We asked:

What price have you, your friends or your family paid for the freedom we enjoy? And what price would you willingly pay?

It was a question born out of the horror of images from Ukraine. We hope that the news about the Jan. 6 commission and Ketanji Brown Jackson’s Supreme Court nomination was so riveting that this question was overlooked. We considered another possibility that the images were so traumatic, that our readers didn’t want to consider the question for themselves. We saw the price Ukrainians paid.

One response came from a veteran who noted that being willing to pay the ultimate price for one’s country and surviving was a gift that was repaid over and over throughout his life. “I know exactly what it is like to accept that you are a dead man,” he said. What most closely mirrored my own experience was a respondent who noted her lack of payment in blood, sweat or tears, yet chose to volunteer in helping others exercise their freedom.

Personally, my price includes service to our nation, too. The price I paid was the loss of my former life, which included a husband, a home and a seemingly secure job to enter the political fray with a message of partisan healing and hope for the future. This work isn’t risking my life, but it’s the price I’ve paid.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Given the earnest question we asked, and the meager responses, I am also left wondering if we think at all about the price of freedom? Or have we all become so entitled to our freedom that we fail to defend freedom for others? Or was the question poorly timed?

I read another respondent’s words as an indicator of his pacifism. And another veteran who simply stated his years of service. And that was it. Four responses to a question that lives in my heart every day. We look forward to hearing Your Take on other topics. Feel free to share questions to which you’d like to respond.

Keep ReadingShow less
No, autocracies don't make economies great

libre de droit/Getty Images

No, autocracies don't make economies great

Tom G. Palmer has been involved in the advance of democratic free-market policies and reforms around the globe for more than three decades. He is executive vice president for international programs at Atlas Network and a senior fellow at the Cato Institute.

One argument frequently advanced for abandoning the messy business of democratic deliberation is that all those checks and balances, hearings and debates, judicial review and individual rights get in the way of development. What’s needed is action, not more empty debate or selfish individualism!

In the words of European autocrat Viktor Orbán, “No policy-specific debates are needed now, the alternatives in front of us are obvious…[W]e need to understand that for rebuilding the economy it is not theories that are needed but rather thirty robust lads who start working to implement what we all know needs to be done.” See! Just thirty robust lads and one far-sighted overseer and you’re on the way to a great economy!

Keep ReadingShow less
Podcast: A right-wing perspective on Jan. 6th and the 2020 election

Podcast: A right-wing perspective on Jan. 6th and the 2020 election

Peter Wood is an anthropologist and president of the National Association of Scholars. He believes—like many Americans on the right—that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump and the January 6th riots were incited by the left in collusion with the FBI. He’s also the author of a new book called Wrath: America Enraged, which wrestles with our politics of anger and counsels conservatives on how to respond to perceived aggression.

Where does America go from here? In this episode, Peter joins Ciaran O’Connor for a frank conversation about the role of anger in our politics as well as the nature of truth, trust, and conspiracy theories.

Keep ReadingShow less