Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Fix the FEC quick, bipartisan group of former lawmakers pleads

Porter Goss

One-time CIA Director Porter Goss was one of nine former members of Congress to sign a letter urging action to restore the FEC's quorum.

Win McNamee/Getty Images

With the Federal Election Commission ending its fifth month out of commission, an unusually bipartisan group of departed members of Congress says enough is enough.

Two former senators and seven former House members — five Republicans and four Democrats — pressed the Senate leadership Thursday to confirm new members of the commission right away, so that it can revive oversight of campaign donations and spending in this year's presidential and congressional campaigns.

The group joins coalitions of good-government groups and campaign finance lawyers who have issued similar appeals in recent weeks. But President Trump and Senate leaders are showing no signs of breaking their impasse and allowing the FEC to get back to work. It has been effectively shut down for lack of a quorum since Labor Day.


Just three seats are occupied, and by law it takes four votes for the commission to conduct even the most routine business. But filling the vacancies with people lacking an assertive approach to campaign finance regulation is not the answer, the nine lawmakers said.

"We strongly encourage you to refuse to confirm any FEC nominee who will not enforce campaign laws according to the Constitution, as Congress intended," their letter to the Senate said. "Confirming new commissioners who are opposed to enforcing the law would only extend the current dysfunction and dismantle the power of Congress."

That even five former members from the GOP were willing to sign on to such a message is unusual, because a bedrock view held by the party these days is that the FEC that regulates best is the one that regulates least.

The former members did not specify how the quorum should be restored, though. Because the three remaining commissioners have all agreed to remain past terms that expired years ago, the constitution of an entirely new panel of six is one obvious solution. But that would require a significant personnel deal between the White House and the Senate, because by law members of each party may hold no more than half the FEC seats.

A clean slate is what a bipartisan group of campaign finance lawyers would prefer. But a coalition of good-governance groups called for less drastic action, saying the priority should be restoring a quorum.

Although Trump put forth Texas Republican Party lawyer Trey Trainor as his single nominee more than two years ago, the Senate has never held a confirmation hearing. Historically, vacancies are filled as bipartisan couples, and the Democrats have signaled their choice to pair with Trainor would be senior FEC staffer Shana Broussard. But her nomination has never been formally made.

"The Founders wisely gave the Senate the duty of confirmation so it could ensure that individuals nominated for executive branch positions would faithfully execute the laws of our nation," the former members wrote.

All of the nine left office at least five years ago. The Republicans are former House members Jim Gerlach of Pennsylvania, Sue Myrick of North Carolina, Claudine Schneider of Rhode Island, Zach Wamp of Tennessee and Porter Goss of Florida, who went on to be CIA director in the George W. Bush administration. The Democrats were two former senators, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, and former House members Lynn Woolsey of California and Tim Roemer of Indiana, later ambassador to India in the Barack Obama administration.

All belong to the ReFormers Caucus, a group of ex-members advocating for democracy reforms and aligned with the political advocacy group Issue One. (That organization is also the parent of, but journalistically independent from, The Fulcrum.)


Read More

A person signing a piece of paper with other people around them.

Javon Jackson, center, was able to register to vote following passage of a 2019 Nevada law that restored voting rights to formerly incarcerated individuals.

The Nation Is Missing Millions of Voters Due to Lack of Rights for Former Felons

If you gathered every American with a prison record into one contiguous territory and admitted it to the union, you would create the 12th-largest state. It would be home to at least 7 million to 8 million people and hold a dozen votes in the Electoral College.

In a close presidential race, this hypothetical state of the formerly incarcerated could decide who wins the White House.

Keep ReadingShow less
People standing at voting booths.

The proposed SAVE Act and MEGA Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, risking the disenfranchisement of millions of eligible Americans.

Getty Images, EvgeniyShkolenko

The SAVE Act is a Solution in Search of A Problem

The federal government seems to be barreling toward a federal election power grab. Trump's State of the Union address called for the Senate to push through the SAVE Act, which has already passed the House, in the name of so-called "election integrity." And the SAVE Act isn’t the only such bill. Like the SAVE Act, the Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act—introduced in the House—would require voters to provide a document outlined in the Act that allegedly proves their U.S. citizenship. We’ve been down this road before in Texas, and spoiler alert: it was unworkable.

Both the SAVE and MEGA Acts would disenfranchise millions of eligible U.S. citizens without making our federal elections more secure. They seek to roll out a faulty federal voter registration system, despite the existing separate registration and voting process for state and local elections. And these Acts target a minuscule “problem”—but would unleash mass voter purges and confusion.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stickers with the words "I Voted Today."

Virginia is on its way to be the 19th jurisdiction to adopt the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, bringing the U.S. closer to electing presidents by the national popular vote.

Getty Images, EyeWolf

Virginia On The Path to Join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

NPVIC is an agreement among U.S. states and the District of Columbia to award all their electoral votes to the presidential ticket that wins the overall popular vote in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. It is considered a pragmatic, voluntary state-based initiative because it aims to ensure the winner of the national popular vote wins the presidency without requiring a constitutional amendment, operating instead within the existing Electoral College framework by utilizing states' constitutional authority to appoint electors. If enough states join the NPVIC to reach a total of 270 electoral votes, the United States will effectively shift from a winner-take-all (WTA) regime to a national popular vote system for electing the President.

With Virginia's adoption, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact will be adopted by eighteen states and the District of Columbia, collectively holding 222 electoral votes. The compact requires 270 electoral votes (a majority of the 538 total) to take effect. It currently needs forty-eight more electoral votes to become active.

Keep ReadingShow less
With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

Should the U.S. nationalize elections? A constitutional analysis of federalism, the Elections Clause, and the risks of centralized control over voting systems.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Why Nationalizing Elections Threatens America’s Federalist Design

The Federalism Question: Why Nationalizing Elections Deserves Skepticism

The renewed push to nationalize American elections, presented as a necessary reform to ensure uniformity and fairness, deserves the same skepticism our founders directed toward concentrated federal power. The proposal, though well-intentioned, misunderstands both the constitutional architecture of our republic and the practical wisdom in decentralized governance.

The Constitutional Framework Matters

The Constitution grants states explicit authority over the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections, with Congress retaining only the power to "make or alter such Regulations." This was not an oversight by the framers; it was intentional design. The Tenth Amendment reinforces this principle: powers not delegated to the federal government remain with the states and the people. Advocates for nationalization often cite the Elections Clause as justification, but constitutional permission is not constitutional wisdom.

Keep ReadingShow less