Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Bills advance in California for more open primaries, mandatory voting

2018 California primary voting

California primary voters will have more flexibility to change their party affiliation prior to the the March 3 primary if a voter registration bill is enancted.

David McNew/Getty Images

California, the biggest and one of the bluest states in the country, is about to enact a bill that will make voter registration less rigidly partisan.

The measure looks likely to be on the books in time to permit many thousands of additional people to vote in the Democratic primary on March 3. California has the biggest trove of delegates in the country, 415 of them — by far the biggest prize of 16 states and territories voting on Super Tuesday.

And it is not the only voting bill drawing headlines in Sacramento this week. A Democratic lawmaker who's been central to several of the state's recent expansions of access to the ballot box proposed making voting mandatory.


The registration measure would permit voters to change party preference or residential address within two weeks of an election without having to re-register to vote.

It could be cleared by the Senate as soon as the end of the week, having passed the Assembly, 60-12, on Monday. That overwhelming vote, if echoed on the other side of the capital, signals the Democratic-majority Legislature would override a potential veto. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom rejected a similar measure last year on the grounds it could cost too much to implement.

The law now makes voters submit a new registration form if they move or want to change party affiliation. No new forms are processed within 15 days of a primary or general election, but people may file provisional applications and then cast provisional ballots at the polls.

Those restrictions mostly restrict turnout in GOP primaries, which are open only to registered Republicans. The state Democratic Party permits crossover voters in primaries if people are willing to wait in line at their polling places for a special crossover ballot. This caused hours-long backups during the 2018 midterm congressional and gubernatorial primaries.

"This will help reduce wait times, the number of provisional ballots cast, and backlogs during the canvass period while maintaining safeguards to ensure accurate voter rolls," the American Civil Liberty Union of California said in endorsing the bill.

But the Peace and Freedom Party of California is lobbying against the measure, fearing it would lead to a loss of membership in such minor parties.

The compulsory voting measure, by state Rep. Marc Levine, would force all registered voters to return ballots in future elections — although they could be left blank or incomplete. Failure to vote would subject people to penalties similar to those for skipping jury duty.

No jurisdiction in the United States has such a requirement, although voting is required in more than a dozen other countries including such functional democracies as Australia and Belgium. And it's unclear this legislation will advance beyond a hearing likely next month.

"Democracy is not a spectator sport — it requires the active participation of all its citizens," Levine said in a statement. "California is a national leader on expanding voting rights to its citizens. Those rights come with a responsibility by registered voters to cast their ballot and make sure that their voice is heard by their government."

Critics argue that mandatory voting violates civil liberties and makes the universe of voters less plugged in on the issues.

California ranked in the mid 30s for turnout in the last two national elections, dispute new laws enacted in hopes of boosting voter participation. Levine helped write several of them.

Counties may now send all their registered voters a ballot in the mail, which may then be returned postage-free. The state recently added itself to the rosters of places with same-day registration and where eligible people are automatically registered when they apply for a driver's license. And the law now requires election officials to contact voters who submit mail-in ballots without signatures so they have a chance to correct the error.


Read More

Trump’s Anti-Latino Racism is a Major Liability for Democracy

Close-up of sign reading 'Immigrants Make America Great' at a Baltimore rally.

Trump’s Anti-Latino Racism is a Major Liability for Democracy

Donald Trump’s second administration has fully clarified Latinos’ racial position in America: our ethnic group’s labor, culture, and aspirations are too much for his supporters to stomach. The Latino presence in America triggers too many uneasy questions (are they White?), too many doubts (are they really American?), and too much resentment (why are they doing better than me?).

Trump’s targeted deportations of undocumented Latinos, unwarranted arrests of Latino citizens, and heightened ICE presence in Latino neighborhoods address these worries by lumping Latinos with Black people. Simply put, we have become yet another visible population that America socially stigmatizes, economically exploits, and politically terrorizes because aggrieved White adults want to preserve their rank as our nation’s premier racial group. The cumulative impacts are serious: just yesterday, an international panel of investigators on human rights and racism, backed by the U.N., found that such actions have resulted in “grave human rights violations.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Just the Facts: The SAVE Act and the Future of Voter ID Rules
A close up of a window with a sticker on it
Photo by Zach Wear on Unsplash

Just the Facts: The SAVE Act and the Future of Voter ID Rules

Last week, I wrote a column in the Fulcrum entitled “Just the Facts: Voter ID, States’ Powers, and Federal Limits.” The facts presented in that writing made it clear that the U.S. Constitution does not require voter ID and left almost all election administration—including voter qualifications—to the states. However, over time, constitutional amendments and federal statutes have restricted states’ ability to impose discriminatory voting rules, but they have never mandated voter ID.

The SAVE America Act

The national debate over voter ID has entered a new phase with the introduction of the SAVE America Act, the most sweeping federal voter‑identification and citizenship‑documentation proposal in modern history. For more than two centuries, voter eligibility rules—ID included—have been primarily a matter of state authority, bounded by constitutional protections against discrimination. The SAVE America Act would shift that balance by imposing federal requirements for both photo identification and documentary proof of citizenship in federal elections.

Keep ReadingShow less
Posters are displayed next to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) as he speaks at a news conference to unveil the Take It Down Act to protect victims against non-consensual intimate image abuse, on Capitol Hill on June 18, 2024 in Washington, DC.

A lawsuit against xAI over AI-generated deepfakes targeting teenage girls exposes a growing crisis in schools. As laws struggle to keep up, this story explores AI accountability, teen safety, and what educators and parents must do now.

Getty Images, Andrew Harnik

Deepfakes: The New Face of Cyberbullying and Why Parents, Schools, and Lawmakers Must Act

As a former teacher who worked in a high school when Snapchat was born, I witnessed the birth of sexting and its impact on teens. I recall asking a parent whether he was checking his daughter’s phone for inappropriate messages. His response was, “sometimes you just don’t want to know.” But the federal lawsuit filed last week against Elon Musk's xAI has put a national spotlight on AI-generated deepfakes and the teenage girls they target. Parents and teachers can’t ignore the crisis inside our schools.

AI Companies Built the Tool. The Grok Lawsuit Says They Own the Damage.

Whether the theory of French prosecutors–that Elon Musk deliberately allowed the sexualized image controversy to grow so that it would drive up activity on the platform and boost the company’s valuation–is true or not, when a company makes the decision to build a tool and knows that it can be weaponized but chooses to release it anyway, they are making a risk-based decision believing that they can act without consequence. The Grok lawsuit could make these types of business decisions much more costly.

Keep ReadingShow less