Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

How the Jan. 6 anniversary and voting rights are tied together

Rioters storm the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021

Protesterss try to push past security at a door of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021

Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

From the moment rioters breached the building on Jan. 6, 2021, the attack on the U.S. Capitol has been politicized. Democrats have used it as an anti-Trump rallying cry; Republicans have mostly condemned the rioters while placing blame on the media, the left wing of the nation, and Democratic leaders in Congress.

As the nation prepares to mark the first anniversary of the storming of the Capitol on Thursday, Americans are no closer to unity. And both parties are using the occasion to push their own agenda.

For Democrats, that means one more push to pass the Freedom to Vote Act in the Senate, where it and other election-related legislation remain stymied by Republican filibusters. But Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is expected to put the Freedom to Vote Act on the floor this week, directly tying it to Jan. 6.


Once again, Democrats will fail to find the 10 Republican votes needed to overcome a GOP filibuster and advance the bill. Schumer and the rest of his party know this, but hope the emotions evoked by the anniversary of the insurrection may convince two moderate Democrats to support fundamental changes to Senate rules that would allow the bill to get through the chamber.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Barring a change of heart by Republicans, the only way to pass the voting rights legislation is to change or eliminate the filibuster rule, which allows the minority to prevent the Senate from approving legislation. The filibuster was designed to give a voice to the minority and force the majority to negotiate. But in the 21st century Senate, both parties use it as a blocker, rather than a negotiating tool.

While some Democrats and liberal voting rights advocates want to change the rules, either by eliminating the filibuster or creating a “carve out” for voting rights legislation, their colleagues Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona and Joe Manchin of West Virginia remain adamantly opposed. Backers of the legislation hope the emotions of the week will spur a change in the Democratic pair’s thinking.

However, Sinema and Manchin are unlikely to be swayed unless more Republicans get on board.

Meanwhile, some members of Congress are focused this week on Capitol security during the riot. The Senate Rules and Administration Committee will hold a hearing Wednesday to review the Capitol Police response, and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy has already made that subject a key talking point this week.

“As we have said from the start, the actions of that day were lawless and as wrong as wrong can be. Our Capitol should never be compromised and those who broke the law deserve to face legal repercussions and full accountability,” McCarthy wrote in a letter to House Republicans. “Unfortunately, one year later, the majority party seems no closer to answering the central question of how the Capitol was left so unprepared and what must be done to ensure it never happens again. Instead, they are using it as a partisan political weapon to further divide our country.”

A new CBS News/YouGov poll conducted at the end of December found an overwhelming majority of Americans — 83 percent — disapprove of the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, including 76 percent of Republicans. However, they were divided over who was involved, with 41 percent of Republicans saying most of the people who forced their way into the Capitol were left-leaning groups (there’s no evidence of this). Overall, 79 percent of respondents said Trump supporters were responsible.

In a scary sign of times ahead, 62 percent said they expect there will be violence from the losing side in future presidential elections. While under 5 percent of respondents who identify with either party definitely said they would favor such violence, 15 percent of Democrats and 30 percent of Republicans said it “depends.” The issues most likely to justify violence were civil rights (35 percent), gun policies (29 percent) and election results (28 percent).

Polling by The Washington Post and University of Maryland found similar results on the use of violence. One-third of Americans told pollsters in mid-December think it is sometimes justified to take violent action against the government.

The biggest reasons in the poll were: taking away people’s rights (22 percent), the collapse of democracy or a coup (15 percent) and violation of the Constitution by the government (13 percent).

While a majority of Americans remain positive about democracy, that number is dwindling: 54 percent told the Post/Maryland pollsters that they are very or somewhat proud of the way Democracy works in the United States. That number has been in steady decline for the past 20 years. In September 2001, following the 9/11 attacks, that number hit 96 percent and has been dropping ever since.

While the country rallied together around 9/11, it was driven further apart by 1/6.

Read More

majority vs minority
Sanga Park/Getty Images

Make a choice: majoritarian democracy or minority tyranny?

Nelson is a retired attorney and served as an associate justice of the Montana Supreme Court from 1993 through 2012.

What is more American than majority rule — the principle that 50.1 percent carries the day when decisions affecting all of us are made? The majority wins, and the minority has to accept, even if not graciously, the decision of the greater number. That’s how decisions are made in this country. Right?

Not necessarily!

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump

Former President Donald Trump

Jabin Botsford/Getty Images

Scholars unmask Trump election lawyers’ use of falsified evidence

Rosenfeld is the editor and chief correspondent of Voting Booth, a project of the Independent Media Institute.

After 2022’s midterm election, I had an email exchange with Robert Beadles, a combative northern Nevada businessman and Donald Trump devotee. His post-2020 hounding of Reno’s top election official had pushed her to resign. Beadles didn’t trust the midterm results either and offered a $50,000 reward to anyone who’d prove that it was not stolen.

Easy money, right? Beadles’ distrust was tribal. But his reward hinged on refuting a statistical analysis that he waved like the flag. His statistician, Edward Solomon, who lived halfway across the country, found mathematical aberrations in the results that he didn’t like. The men claimed that was proof enough that the announced election results were dishonest.

I, and several experienced analysts — a math PhD, a computer scientist, and an election auditor who had spent years studying election systems, voting data, and procedures — tried to explain why the statistics, alone, did not prove anything. We politely told him what records to obtain, why they mattered, what methodologies to use. Beadles didn’t care and soon lashed out.

Keep ReadingShow less
D.C. Police Officer Daniel Hodges shakes hands with Rep. Liz Cheney at a hearing

Officer Daniel Hodges of the D.C. police force shakes hands with then-Rep. Liz Cheney at a July 21, 2022, House committee hearing investigating the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol.

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Remembering Jan. 6 with an officer injured in the line of duty

To mark the third anniversary of the attacks on the Capitol, the hosts of the “Politics Is Everything” podcast talked with D.C. Metropolitan Police Officer Daniel Hodges, who was beaten by rioters that day.

Keep ReadingShow less
Election challengers in Detroit in 2020

Election challengers demand to observe the counting of absentee ballots in Detroirt in 2020. The room had reached capacity.

Salwan Georges/The Washington Post via Getty Images

It's 2024 and the battle for democracy in the U.S. continues

Merloe provides strategic advice on democracy and elections to U.S. and international organizations. He is a former director of election integrity programs at the nonpartisan National Democratic Institute for International Affairs.

The U.S. political environment is suffering from toxic polarization, with election deniers constantly spewing noxious vapors to negate belief in the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election, the integrity of election administration, and the honorableness of their political opponents. The constant pollution has blinded many from seeing the real state of things and is causing others to close their eyes to avoid the irritation. The resulting diminished public confidence and perhaps participation in elections creates more precarious conditions in 2024 than it faced in 2020 and 2022.

I’ve learned an important lesson from observing elections in more than 50 countries: Even when elections are credible, if a large segment of the population is made to believe otherwise their outcome and the fate of democracy can easily be placed in jeopardy. Unfortunately, that is a central feature of the present electoral circumstance, and concerted action is needed to mitigate that damage and prevent it from worsening.

Keep ReadingShow less