Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

How red states have overhauled their election systems, part II

election law changes in the states
whyframestudio/Getty Images

This is the ninth in a series of articles examining changes to voting laws in every state.

The ongoing election evolution in the United States, while in large part catalyzed by the Covid-19 pandemic, has been building momentum for years.

Many states were already undergoing major overhauls to their election systems leading up to the 2020 election, even before the pandemic gripped the nation. And in the aftermath of the presidential contest, states have doubled down on voting reforms.

To provide a comprehensive analysis of the voting law changes in every state and Washington, D.C., since 2019, The Fulcrum compiled data from the Voting Rights Lab, the National Conference for State Legislatures, the Brennan Center for Justice, and state statutes and constitutions. This ninth installment focuses on the five reliably Republican states.

Republicans have complete control over the executive and legislative branches of government in Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma and West Virginia. Each of the states made some modifications to their election laws over the past three years, although some went much further than others.


The chart below provides an overview of how voting practices have changed or remained the same in these states over the past two years. A more detailed explanation of each state's changes follows.

Made with Flourish

More from Election Evolution:

How the 5 most populous states have overhauled their election systems
How the 5 vote-by-mail states have overhauled their election systems
How 5 swing states have overhauled their election systems
How the 4 early primary states have overhauled their election systems
How 5 Southern states have overhauled their election systems
How blue states have overhauled their election systems, Part I
How blue states have overhauled their election systems, Part II
How red states have overhauled their election systems, part I

Missouri

The Show Me State, which had supported three Democratic presidential candidates in the six elections from 1976 to 1996 but has backed every Republican presidential candidate since 2000, put into place few changes to voting procedures over the past three years.

In 2020, in response to the Covid-19 pandemic, Missouri allowed all registered voters to cast ballots by mail. However, that expansion of ballot access expired on Dec. 21, 2020.

The Missouri Supreme Court ruled in January 2020 that the state’s voter identification law, which required the submission of an affidavit for non-photo forms of ID, violated the state Constitution. As a result, voters are now allowed to use non-photo forms of ID such as bank statements, college IDs and election cards.

Montana

As a predominantly white, rural, sparsely populated state, Montana has demonstrated strong Republican majorities throughout much of its recent history. The GOP controls about two-thirds of the seats in both chambers of the Legislature, and Gov. Greg Gianforte, is also a Republican. The state has voted in favor of the Republican presidential candidate in every election since 1968.

Over the past three years, there have been numerous changes to the state’s election legislation, tightening some rules but also easing certain aspects of the voting process.

In 2021, Gianforte signed a bill eliminating same-day voter registration (setting the deadline as noon the day before an election) and another creating a photo ID requirement to vote. Any person who attempts to vote without a photo ID or a concealed carry permit must provide two alternate forms of identification.

One of the new laws prohibits political parties from participating in election-related activities on college campuses, such as registering voters or encouraging people to cast ballots. Punishment includes a $1,000 fine for each violation. While the law was to go into effect on July 1, 2021, implementation has been delayed by lawsuits.

Two other bills also address election-related criminal issues. One bill expands the instances in which deceiving a disabled voter is a misdemeanor offense. Another directs the secretary of state to adopt a rule prohibiting people from receiving payment in exchange for returning a ballot on behalf of another voter. The penalty is $100 per ballot.

On the other hand, the state passed new measures to make it easier to vote in certain cases. Multiple laws set requirements for accessible voting technology at every polling place during every election, making it easier for voters with disabilities to cast their ballots. Another expanded the list of valid identification options for registering and voting, to include military ID, tribal ID cards and others.

Additional changes include:

  • Allowing uniformed overseas voters to use a secure digital signature for registering and voting.
  • Allows voters who registered late to return their absentee ballot to a polling place on Election Day.
  • Permitting a third party to return a ballot on behalf of a voter. The law includes certain restrictions that are currently blocked by a permanent injunction issued in September 2020.
  • Expanding the window for preparing absentee ballots to be counted from one business day before Election Day to three business days. (The window is narrower in counties with small populations.) Automatic tabulation may begin one day before Election Day but manual counting cannot start until Election Day.
  • Shortening the required hours that a polling place must be open in precincts with fewer than 400 registered voters who plan to vote in person. Notice of a change in hours must be mailed to voters no later than 30 days before the election. The hours for a polling place that is partially or entirely within an American Indian reservation may not be changed prior to consulting with reservation leaders.
  • Requiring annual voter list maintenance, rather than an every-other-year review.

Nebraska

Nebraska politics has been predominantly led by the Republican Party for decades. In almost every presidential election since 1940 (with 1964 being the outlier), the Republican candidate has won the majority of the state’s votes. Nebraska is the only state with a unicameral, nonpartisan legislative system, although lawmakers do affiliate with the political parties.

Most of the election law changes made since 2019 were relatively minor adjustments to existing laws.

One wide-ranging bill enacted in 2020 defines the requirements and rules for pollwatchers, allows hand-delivery of ballots to the county clerk and requires at least one 24-hour drop box to be placed in each county at least 10 days before an election.

Other changes include:

  • Allowing the secretary of state to charge voter registration information with the interstate Electronic Registration Infrastructure Center.
  • Limiting the sharing of voter lists received through public records requests.

Oklahoma

Republican presidential candidates have long been victorious in Oklahoma, with Lyndon Johnson's win in 1964 being the only exception since the 1940s. Over the past five elections, Republicans have defeated Democrats by more than 30 percent. That dominance extends to the state level, with the GOP controlling the governor’s office and both legislative chambers.

While the Legislature enacted a number of changes to make voting easier, those modifications were accompanied by more restrictive laws.

In 2019, lawmakers passed a bill that allows people at least 17.5 years of age to pre-register to vote and requires employers to give employees two hours off to vote during early voting periods.

In the same year, a new law authorized the Board of Elections to order post-election audits and required county election officials to undertake new cybersecurity measures. The board is also authorized to declare an election emergency in response to security threats or interference.

The following year, the Legislature passed laws tightening the rules on third parties returning absentee ballots on behalf of voters. Such “ballot harvesting” is prohibited with a few exceptions such as a spouse or close relative. Limitations were also placed on assisting voters with filling out absentee ballots. An incapacitated voter may only request the assistance of absentee voting board members to mark a ballot, complete the affidavit or seal envelopes. Absentee ballots must now be notarized or include a copy of their ID.

In 2021, the Legislature shortened the deadline to apply for an absentee ballot by eight days but also expanded the hours for early voting. For general elections in even years, Wednesday early voting is now offered and Saturday early voting begins an hour earlier. The state also instituted an earlier deadline for absentee ballot applications, moving it from seven days before an election to 15.

Oklahoma also instituted new rules around voter list maintenance and purges. They include:

  • County election boards are required to cancel the registration of deceased voters within 30 days of receiving the Department of Health’s monthly list of resident deaths.
  • State officials are authorized to enroll Oklahoma in voter list maintenance programs and make use of data gleaned through membership.
  • The secretary of state can use National Change of Address data for voter list maintenance.

The Legislature also repealed Oklahoma’s existing ban on recounts of statewide issue or question elections, mandating automatic recounts by the Board of Elections in those two circumstances. The governor or attorney general is allowed to request recounts through a petition to the board.

West Virginia

West Virginia, another Republican trifecta with a history of backing GOP presidential candidates, has enacted a limited number of permanent voting laws since 2019.

The Legislature has expanded absentee voting eligibility in recent years. In 2019, the state increased access to absentee ballots for people with disabilities, illnesses or injuries. While the secretary of state allowed all voters to vote by mail in 2020 in response to the Covid-19 pandemic, that policy expired after that election.

The state also allowed counties to store and maintain voter registration records in a digital format in 2020.

In 2021, West Virginia expanded ballot return options for voters with physical disabilities and voters who are overseas and in the military. Although several new laws aimed at improving West Virginia’s mail voting system were proposed in 2021, none were passed.


Read More

AI chip
a computer chip with the letter a on top of it
Photo by Igor Omilaev on Unsplash

We Should Regulate AI to Make It Grow Faster

The debate over artificial intelligence has become divided between two powerful ideas: that we need a “moratorium” to slow AI until we can make it safe, and that regulating AI will slow the innovation we need for our economy and national security. Both concerns are legitimate. But “moratorium” and “slowing AI growth” are divisive terms: they reassure those concerned about AI's safety, economic and environmental consequences while alarming those who see AI competition and national security as urgent priorities. We need a different starting point—meaningful regulation that provides the safeguards necessary to protect people, communities and the environment while creating the conditions for AI to continue growing. The experiences of Europe and China challenge the assumption that regulation must slow AI.

China has combined increasingly detailed, technology-specific AI regulation with substantial government support for AI development. Recent studies provide evidence that this approach can promote innovation. One 2026 study of Chinese companies from 2017 through 2023 found that the creation of national AI innovation and development pilot zones significantly increased corporate digital transformation, in part through increased research and development, human capital and reduced transition costs. Another 2026 study, covering Chinese manufacturing companies from 2014 through 2024, found that the same policy significantly promoted the adoption of intelligent technologies.

Keep ReadingShow less
The History of U.S. Prevention Through Deterrence: Effective Border Policy or Humanitarian Risk?

The History of U.S. Prevention Through Deterrence: Effective Border Policy or Humanitarian Risk?

A Brief History of Prevention Through Deterrence

The U.S. Border Patrol agency has evolved greatly over the years, shifting its focus to address changing national security concerns. It was originally established in 1924 to restrict illegal immigration by Chinese and European immigrants before moving to restrict alcohol smuggling during Prohibition. The agency adopted its current focus on illegal immigration from Mexico during the 1970s, when immigration pressures coincided with a severe economic recession in the United States. In 1994, the Border Patrol released a strategy document with the support of the Clinton administration which introduced an approach to immigration known as Prevention Through Deterrence. This tactic aimed to discourage border crossings by funneling immigrants through border entry points with harsh terrain, in contrast with previous policies based on arrest and apprehension post-entry.

Successful Prevention Through Deterrence is measured by fewer encounters and apprehensions at the border, indicating that illegal attempts to enter the country have been prevented and deterred. Barriers to entry are policed by a range of physical infrastructure like fences, vehicle barriers, and other blockades designed to stop illegal foot and vehicle traffic. These measures are supported by camera- and thermal-based surveillance systems as well as measures like deportation and criminal charges which impose legal consequences on migrants. The focus of Prevention Through Deterrence operations themselves is twofold: establishing control of high-traffic border sectors and using security measures to enable the seizure of contraband.

Keep ReadingShow less
A microphone in the foreground and a crowd, blurry in the background.

INC ‘26 gathered independent leaders in D.C. to unveil a seven-candidate slate, a Fulcrum Caucus strategy and new tools for corruption-free governance.

Getty Images, uschools

Independent Movement Unites at INC ’26 to Build National Power

From September 23–25, leaders from across the American independent political movement gathered at the JW Marriott in Washington, D.C., for the fourth Independent National Convention (INC ’26). Produced by United Independents, the event brought together hundreds of participants representing political reform organizations, independent campaigns, alternative parties, civic initiatives and grassroots organizing efforts.

The gathering reflected the breadth of activity outside the traditional two-party system while addressing a persistent challenge: translating America's large independent constituency into greater political representation, institutional capacity, and coordinated action.

Keep ReadingShow less
Meeting, handshake and business people with deal in office for funding approval and success.

Four Reds and four Blues reached unanimous Points of Agreement on immigration, then presented them to Reps. Fitzpatrick and Suozzi. Here’s how it worked.

Jacob Wackerhausen/Getty Images

On Immigration, Common Ground May Be Closer Than We Think

Immigration has become one of the issues pulling Americans apart. Earlier this month, at a constituent conversation in Bristol, Pennsylvania, I watched eight Americans with very different political views offer a glimpse of how it does not have to stay that way.

Four “Reds” and four “Blues” — terms used for participants on the political right and left — sat across from Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) and Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.), the Republican and Democratic co-chairs of the House Problem Solvers Caucus, to present something increasingly unusual in our politics: unanimous Points of Agreement on immigration developed through an earlier Common Ground Workshop.

Keep ReadingShow less