Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The state of voting: Sept. 6, 2022

voting legislation updates

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 2,195 bills so far this session, with 581 bills that tighten voter access or election administration and 1,048 bills that expand the rules. The rest are neutral or mixed or unclear in their impact.

Last week, a federal court in Wisconsin ruled that voters with disabilities are entitled to assistance when returning mail ballots, while a Massachusetts court affirmed the legitimacy of recent election reforms, including no-excuse mail voting and in-person early voting.

Meanwhile, Republican groups sued Pennsylvania counties over ballot envelope curing processes.

Looking ahead: The Michigan Board of State Canvassers deadlocked during a vote on the certification of the Promote the Vote ballot measure, which seeks to make voting more accessible to Michigan voters. The state Supreme Court must decide whether the measure will be on the November ballot by Friday, Sept. 9.

Here are the details:


A federal court rules that Wisconsin voters with disabilities have a right to assistance when returning absentee ballots. A federal court struck down the Wisconsin Election Commission’s guidance requiring absentee ballots to be returned by the voter without assistance from a third party or agent. A U.S. District Court determined this guidance was in violation of Section 208 of the Voting Rights Act, which entitles those with disabilities the right to have assistance when voting.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

State and national GOP groups sue Pennsylvania counties over ballot envelope cure. Several national and state Republican groups filed suit against both acting Secretary of the Commonwealth Leigh Chapman and county election officials, seeking to prevent county officials from notifying voters about minor errors on ballot return envelopes and giving them an opportunity to correct (or “cure”) the issue. Pennsylvania statutory law is silent on cure procedures, and the plaintiffs argue that the varying procedures between counties can lead to unequal treatment of voters. The plaintiffs separately rely on a version of the “independent state legislature” theory by arguing that counties may not create cure procedures unless explicitly authorized by the legislature.

Massachusetts court affirms validity of election reforms. The Supreme Judicial Court for the County of Suffolk rejected a state constitutional challenge to early voting and mail voting legislation brought by the state Republican Party. The plaintiffs in the case argued that the state Constitution does not allow the Legislature to establish no-excuse mail voting or in-person early voting.

Michigan canvassing board deadlocks on ballot measure. The Michigan Board of State Canvassers voted 2-2 on the question of certification of the Promote the Vote ballot measure for the November ballot. If approved by voters, the measure would increase access to in-person early voting, require a minimum number of ballot drop boxes in every city or township, and establish guardrails for boards of canvassers throughout the election certification process. Due to the deadlock by the state board, the state Supreme Court must decide whether the measure will be on the November ballot by Friday.

Read More

Just the Facts: DEI

Colorful figures in a circle.

Getty Images, AndreyPopov

Just the Facts: DEI

The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, looking to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best as we can, we work to remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces.

However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Republican Party Can Build A Winning Coalition With Independents

People voting at a polling booth.

Getty Images//Rawpixel

The Republican Party Can Build A Winning Coalition With Independents

The results of the 2024 election should put to bed any doubts as to the power of independent voters to decide key elections. Independents accounted for 34% of voters in 2024, handing President Trump the margin of victory in every swing state race and making him only the second Republican to win the popular vote since 1988. The question now is whether Republicans will build bridges with independent voters and cement a generational winning coalition or squander the opportunity like the Democrats did with the independent-centric Obama coalition.

Almost as many independents came out to vote this past November as Republicans, more than the 31% of voters who said they were Democrats, and just slightly below the 35% of voters who said they were Republicans. In 2020, independents cast just 26% of the ballots nationwide. The President’s share of the independent vote went up 5% compared to the 2020 election when he lost the independent vote to former President Biden by a wide margin. It’s no coincidence that many of the key demographics that President Trump made gains with this election season—Latinos, Asians and African Americans—are also seeing historic levels of independent voter registration.

Keep ReadingShow less
Elon Musk's X Factor Won’t Fix Big Government

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk speaks with former president Donald Trump during a campaign event at the Butler Farm Show, Saturday, Oct. 5, 2024, in Butler, Pa.

Getty Images, The Washington Post

Elon Musk's X Factor Won’t Fix Big Government

Elon Musk’s reputation as a disruptor, transforming industries like automobiles and space travel with Tesla and SpaceX, will be severely tested as he turns his attention to government reform through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). DOGE lacks official agency status and depends on volunteers, raising concerns about its credibility. Musk claims his team of young techies can slash federal spending by $2 trillion, but history casts serious doubt on private-sector fixes for big government. So far, he has largely avoided legal scrutiny with the GOP-led Congress’ help, while handing sensitive operations to his team of “experts.” What could possibly go wrong?

Musk’s plan involves embedding these techies in federal agencies to find inefficiencies. His confidence comes from past successes, such as cost-cutting at X (formerly Twitter) through drastic measures like layoffs. There’s no denying that private-sector innovation has improved government services before—cloud computing, AI-driven fraud detection, and streamlined procurement have saved billions. But running a government isn’t like running a business. It’s not just about efficiency or profit—it’s about providing essential services, enforcing laws, and balancing competing interests to ensure a measure of fairness.

Keep ReadingShow less