Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

House-passed election security bill has little chance in Senate

House-passed election security bill has little chance in Senate

Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon in joined by other congressional Democrats in offering their support for the SAFE Act, which mandates use of paper ballots and provides grants for election equipment and security.

Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

The House of Representatives on Thursday passed legislation requiring the use of paper ballots and providing grants for replacing voting systems and improving security, but the bill stands minimal chance of advancing any further.

Everyone in the Democratic majority voted for the SAFE Act – for Securing America's Federal Elections – but only one Republican did so.

Similar Republican resistance in the Senate, led by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell at the urging of President Donald Trump, means the bill looks to be shelved for the indefinite future. But Democrats in the House wanted to make a show of passing it nonetheless as a way of sending a message they care about protecting the 2020 presidential vote from foreign hackers.


"Every American, no matter their choice in politics, should know their vote will be counted as cast," said California Democrat Zoe Lofgren, the author of the legislation and chairwoman of the panel that oversees federal elections.

The bill is a response to Russian attacks on U.S. election systems during the 2016 election cycle, including intrusions into voter registration systems.

Rodney Davis of Illinois, the top Republican on Lofgren's panel, criticized the bill as a "top-down federally mandated approach" that dictates to local governments how to respond to election security concerns. He blamed the Obama administration for not responding as soon as intelligence officials began to report on Russian attempts to hack U.S. election systems.

"This bill is simply another partisan bill by the majority," he said.

Davis called for resumption of negotiations on a bipartisan bill, but Lofgren said Democrats had "tried in vain" to negotiate with Republicans and were not successful.

The requirement for paper ballots is intended to prevent fraud and to allow voters to ensure their votes on accurately recorded. The bill also authorizes $1.3 billion for grants to implement new voting systems and to carry out security improvements. Those funds would still have to be appropriated by Congress.

Meanwhile the House also passed on Thursday, again on a mostly partisan vote of 224-196, an appropriations bill that includes $16.2 million to operate the Election Assistance Commission in the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1. That is a 75 percent increase over the current year. In addition, the bill includes $600 million for the commission to dole out to states for election improvements, almost doubling the $380 million set aside for that purpose in this year's budget.

The bill is a sprawling package that sets spending levels for a long roster of agencies under the heading of financial services and general government. It now goes to the Senate, where interest in advancing the annual budget bills is stronger than in addressing politically fraught policy measures.


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