Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Despite pandemic, survey finds most voters trust election's safety and integrity

Voter study

A new study finds a majority of voters believe the fall election safely despite pandemic. Here, Louisville voters participate in Kentucky's June primary.

Brett Carlsey/Getty Photos

While most voters believe their health will not be at risk while casting ballots in November, attitudes about the election depend greatly on political affiliation and demographic factors, a recent report found.

The study, released Thursday by the Rand Corp., details expectations among voters about public safety, election integrity and the preparedness of local officials to run the 2020 presidential election amid the Covid-19 pandemic. Most voters — 55 percent — trust that their vote will be properly counted after months of President Trump and other administration officials casting doubts on voting by mail. F

Political affiliation significantly influenced responses. Among Republicans, 86 percent feel voting will be safe from health risks, while only 54 percent of Democrats agree. Republicans were also more concerned than Democrats that their votes won't be properly counted.


Race and age also affected how people responded. White and older respondents had significantly more trust that their votes would be counted than Black, Hispanic and younger respondents. As a previous survey found, many young voters are worried about the integrity of the election. Overall, older voters — despite being at higher risk of Covid-19 infection — had more positive perceptions of election safety, integrity and preparedness.

"This might reflect the fact that, in recent decades, older Americans have generally tended to have greater trust in government institutions than younger Americans," the report concluded.

The survey also found a correlation between those who question election safety or integrity and those less likely to vote. More than seven in 10 of those who voted in 2016 or 2018 believe in the election's integrity, while just four in 10 of those who did not vote in the last two elections have that same belief.

Despite these differences, there was widespread support "for sanitation and social distancing at poll locations but lower support for sending mail-in ballots to all registered voters or using online voting."

While the number of voters casting their ballots by mail has increased steadily over the past 30 years, a large jump is expected this year due in part to the pandemic and correlated health fears. Almost half of voters plan to vote remotely, up from about a third in the last election.

The report, though, said expanding no-excuse mail-in voting as well as targeting messages at the most skeptical groups might mitigate voter concerns.

Rand surveyed more than 2,000 respondents in late May and early June across the country and considers its findings to be a snapshot in time, when the pandemic had mostly affected the Northeast and Midwest. Because of the ever-changing dynamics of the virus, current attitudes on voting could vary, the company said.


Read More

Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses
black video camera
Photo by Matt C on Unsplash

Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses

This week, I joined a coalition of journalists in Washington, D.C., to speak directly with lawmakers about a crisis unfolding in plain sight: the rapid disappearance of local, community‑rooted journalism. The advocacy day, organized by the Hispanic Technology & Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP), brought together reporters and media leaders who understand that the future of local news is inseparable from the future of American democracy.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Keep ReadingShow less
People wearing vests with "ICE" and "Police" on the back.

The latest shutdown deal kept government open while exposing Congress’s reliance on procedural oversight rather than structural limits on ICE.

Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

A Shutdown Averted, and a Narrow Window Into Congress’s ICE Dilemma

Congress’s latest shutdown scare ended the way these episodes usually do: with a stopgap deal, a sigh of relief, and little sense that the underlying conflict had been resolved. But buried inside the agreement was a revealing maneuver. While most of the federal government received longer-term funding, the Department of Homeland Security, and especially Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), was given only a short-term extension. That asymmetry was deliberate. It preserved leverage over one of the most controversial federal agencies without triggering a prolonged shutdown, while also exposing the narrow terrain on which Congress is still willing to confront executive power. As with so many recent budget deals, the decision emerged less from open debate than from late-stage negotiations compressed into the final hours before the deadline.

How the Deal Was Framed

Democrats used the funding deadline to force a conversation about ICE’s enforcement practices, but they were careful about how that conversation was structured. Rather than reopening the far more combustible debate over immigration levels, deportation priorities, or statutory authority, they framed the dispute as one about law-enforcement standards, specifically transparency, accountability, and oversight.

Keep ReadingShow less
ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You
A pole with a sign that says polling station
Photo by Phil Hearing on Unsplash

ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You

The brutality of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the related cohort of federal officers in Minneapolis spurred more than 30,000 stalwart Minnesotans to step forward in January and be trained as monitors. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s demands to Minnesota’s Governor demonstrate that the ICE surge is linked to elections, and other ICE-related threats, including Steve Bannon calling for ICE agents deployment to polling stations, make clear that elections should be on the monitoring agenda in Minnesota and across the nation.

A recent exhortation by the New York Times Editorial Board underscores the need for citizen action to defend elections and outlines some steps. Additional avenues are also available. My three decades of experience with international and citizen election observation in numerous countries demonstrates that monitoring safeguards trustworthy elections and promotes public confidence in them - both of which are needed here and now in the US.

Keep ReadingShow less