Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The state of voting: April 25, 2022

State of voting - election law changes

This weekly update summarizing legislative activity affecting voting and elections is powered by the Voting Rights Lab. Sign up for VRL’s weekly newsletter here.

The Voting Rights Lab is tracking 2,446 bills so far this session, with 572 bills that tighten the rules governing voter access or election administration and 1,088 bills that expand the rules.

In Missouri, a provision concerning transgender student athletes was added to a bill that would establish in-person early voting, likely scuttling the legislation, Montana legislators decided not to spend time on election security. And in Arizona, the Senate passed a bill to restore voting rights for people released from prison.

Looking ahead: Arizona legislators will consider a bill restricting the use of drop boxes this week, while Missouri may consider a different bill addressing voter ID and early voting.

Here are the details:


The Missouri House added a “poison pill” to legislation that would create in-person early voting. H.B. 2140 would expand early voting via the in-person absentee voting process; allow first responders, health care workers and members of law enforcement to vote absentee; and allow registered voters to make same-day changes in residence through Election Day. However, during a floor debate on the bill, an amendment was passed concerning transgender student athletes’ participation on school sponsored athletic teams, making the bill very unlikely to pass the Senate. If early voting passes in Missouri this session, it is likely to be through H.B. 1878, legislation that would make the state’s voter ID law more strict but also create in-person early voting. H.B. 1878 has passed the Senate Local Government and Ethics Committee and is ready for consideration by the full Senate.

Arizona’s rights restoration bill passes the Senate. H.B. 2119 passed the Senate last week. The bill would allow people who are not eligible for automatic restoration to apply for their voting rights to be restored immediately upon discharge, instead of having to wait two years, as they do under current law. The bill would also ensure that citizens convicted of or facing felony charges are notified about whether their voting rights will be automatically restored – if so, when; if not, how to apply for restoration. The House will vote on concurrence with the Senate amendments Monday. If the bill passes that vote, it will be eligible for the governor’s signature. H.B. 2238, a bill that would restrict drop boxes by mandating monitoring requirements, will be heard in the Senate Rules Committee Monday.

New Hampshire’s strict voter ID bill passes the House. S.B. 418, which already passed the House and Senate, has been sent to the House Finance Committee. This bill would make the state voter ID law more restrictive. Current New Hampshire law allows voters without ID to cast a regular ballot if they complete an affidavit affirming their identity, under penalty of perjury. This bill would eliminate that alternative, and instead rescind their vote from the count if they are unable to provide an ID. Most states with voter ID laws offer an alternative to ensure the identity of voters without ID can be verified through other means. This new bill would put New Hampshire in the minority.

No Montana special session on election security. The Montana Legislature voted against holding a special session next month to set up a committee on election security. Initially, 10 Republican lawmakers proposed a special session to investigate the state’s election procedure in light of the “widespread belief” of irregularities in the state’s voting system. This committee would have had subpoena powers and included funding for legal staff support.


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