Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

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

Business meeting, blurred background and people in office for teamwork, collaboration and planning

Another recruitment drive won’t fix a nonprofit board. A practical guide to sharing real decision-making power with diverse members: acknowledge, affirm, act.

Jacob Wackerhausen/Getty Images

Before Recruiting Diverse Board Members, Examine Who Holds Power

Nonprofit leaders keep asking me where they will find the next generation of diverse board talent. My question is what those leaders will be allowed to change once they arrive. In this piece, I outline concrete steps boards can take to ensure diverse members have real opportunities to shape organizational decision-making and to translate good intentions into meaningful progress.

In my board service and consulting work, I hear the concern from executives and grassroots activists alike. They worry about recruiting successors, sustaining funding, and governing organizations whose work increasingly depends on partnerships beyond their own walls. I share those concerns. I also wonder whether another recruitment initiative will solve what troubles them.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

jimfeng/Getty Images

Pennsylvania’s Bipartisan Exchange Is Rebuilding Trust in Governance

The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics has nearly 40 years of experience working with legislators from different political parties, and it is building on this history by drawing on lessons from the successful American Congressional Exchange model, begun in 2018 at the Bipartisan Policy Center, and from state exchanges now underway in Minnesota and Michigan. The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics, in collaboration with the Bridge Alliance, has launched the Pennsylvania Legislative Exchange.

This state-based, systematic approach is designed to foster better relationships and build trust across the political aisle with the following guiding principles:

Keep ReadingShow less
Shadow on a wall of Judge hitting gavel in court, concept of justice, law, and legal protection

DOJ lawsuits in Alaska and California preview post-Election Day fights over certification and seating winners. Here’s how officials and voters can prepare.

Aitor Diago / Getty Images

The Lawsuits Will Lose. The Delays Will Still Win.

Less than two weeks before Election Day, President Trump’s Justice Department asked a federal court to stop Alaska from certifying its U.S. Senate race if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses to Democrat Mary Peltola. The lawsuit claims that a second candidate on the ballot, Daniel J. Sullivan, will confuse voters. That argument went nowhere in June, when the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that the state had no legal way to remove him from the ballot. Asked about the suit, the president took credit. “I’m the one that said do it,” he told reporters.

Alongside the Alaska suit, the Trump administration sued California to keep the state from counting mail ballots from 20,000 people it calls “likely” noncitizens. Over the summer, the Department of Homeland Security put that number at 190,000. Legal experts expect both suits to fail, as so many suits like them have. Still, Alaska and California give us an early look at what the weeks after November 3rd could bring: recount demands, calls to review or throw out ballots, and pressure to delay seating winners.

Keep ReadingShow less