Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Conservatives call for more federal funding for election security

Election security

A Beloit, Wis., election worker reviews ballot information on Election Day 2020.

Scott Olson/Getty Images

Leaders of conservative think tanks and advocacy organizations are urging Congress to provide “robust and consistent” funding to state and local governments to bolster election security.

In a letter to House and Senate leaders, the signatories cite recent cyberattacks that threatened national security and the economy, saying those incursions demonstrate the need to protect election infrastructure.


“Leading computer science experts agree that hacking threats against US voting systems are growing and that increasingly out-of-date elections infrastructure make for relatively easy targets,” reads the letter, which was signed by leaders of Americans for Tax Reform, R Street Institute and FreedomWorks, among others.

The letter details security risks to be addressed, including equipment and databases that can be easily hacked; identifies Russia, Iran, China and North Korea as potential attackers; and cites efforts by Republicans and Democrats to address the risks.

"In light of these recent cyberattacks, we urge you to support robust and consistent assistance to state and local governments to ensure the integrity of our nation’s election infrastructure," they wrote.

The letter argues that the parties have an opportunity to build on common ground around shared security goals.

“There is growing bipartisan consensus that supports commonsense solutions to this challenge, including voter-verified paper ballots and audits,” they wrote. “There is also strong support for better federal oversight of voting machine vendors and for strictly keeping voting and tabulation infrastructure off of the Internet.”

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

In 2020, Congress authorized the distribution of $425 million to the states to improve election security measures. That followed on the heels of the $380 million in grants approved in 2018.

This year, Democrats have packed additional election security provisions into the For the People Act, a comprehensive measure negotiated with West Virginia’s Joe Manchin, a conservative Democrat who had opposed earlier electoral reform legislation. But both measures, along with the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, have been blocked by Senate Republicans this year.

“Across the board, our federal government is far too expansive and expensive, but there are times where it has a role to play. Protecting our elections against foreign threats and providing funding for election security are two such cases,” said Matthew Gerner, a fellow in the governance program at R Street and a signatory on the letter.

“While there are some admirable provisions of the so-called For the People Act, the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, they make the problem of an expansive and expensive federal government even worse,” he said. “The For the People Act and the Freedom to Vote Act infringe on free speech rights, and all three bills shift control over elections from state and local governments to Washington, DC. None of them are the right path for federal election legislation.”

The National Election Defense Coalition, which works with groups on the left and the right to secure elections, helped organize the letter.

“Today, the issue of federal funding and prudent standards for paper ballots and audits are national priorities,” said NEDC President Ben Ptashnik. “With clear liberal, centrist and conservative support, Republican leaders in Congress and conservative Democratic Senators like [Joe] Manchin, should do whatever it takes to overcome obstructionism and rebuild confidence in American democracy.”

Read More

Large Bipartisan Majorities Oppose Deep Cuts to Foreign Aid

The Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland releases a new survey, fielded February 6-7, 2025, with a representative sample of 1,160 adults nationwide.

Pexels, Tima Miroshnichenko

Large Bipartisan Majorities Oppose Deep Cuts to Foreign Aid

An overwhelming majority of 89% of Americans say the U.S. should spend at least one percent of the federal budget on foreign aid—the current amount the U.S. spends on aid. This includes 84% of Republicans and 94% of Democrats.

Fifty-eight percent oppose abolishing the U.S. Agency for International Development and folding its functions into the State Department, including 77% of Democrats and 62% of independents. But 60% of Republicans favor the move.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Super Bowl of Unity

A crowd in a football stadium.

Getty Images, Adamkaz

A Super Bowl of Unity

Philadelphia is known as the City of Brotherly Love, and perhaps it is fitting that the Philadelphia Eagles won Sunday night's Super Bowl 59, given the number of messages of unity, resilience, and coming together that aired throughout the evening.

The unity messaging started early as the pre-game kicked off with movie star Brad Pitt narrating a moving ad that champions residence and togetherness in honor of those who suffered from the Los Angeles fires and Hurricane Helen:

Keep ReadingShow less
The Paradox for Independents

A handheld American Flag.

Canva Images

The Paradox for Independents

Political independents in the United States are not chiefly moderates. In The Independent Voter, Thomas Reilly, Jacqueline Salit, and Omar Ali make it clear that independents are basically anti-establishment. They have a "mindset" that aims to dismantle the duopoly in our national politics.

I have previously written about different ways that independents can obtain power in Washington. First, they can get elected or converted in Washington and advocate with their own independent voices. Second, they can seek a revolution in which they would be the most dominant voice in Washington. And third, a middle position, they can seek a critical mass in the Senate especially, namely five to six seats, which would give them leverage to help the majority party get to 60 votes on policy bills.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Bureaucrat’s Dilemma When Dealing with a Charismatic Autocrat

A single pawn separated from a group of pawns.

Canva Images

The Bureaucrat’s Dilemma When Dealing with a Charismatic Autocrat

Excerpt from To Stop a Tyrant by Ira Chaleff

In my book To Stop a Tyrant, I identify five types of a political leader’s followers. Given the importance of access in politics, I range these from the more distant to the closest. In the middle are bureaucrats. No political leader can accomplish anything without a cadre of bureaucrats to implement their vision and policies. Custom, culture and law establish boundaries for a bureaucrat’s freedom of action. At times, these constraints must be balanced with moral considerations. The following excerpt discusses ways in which bureaucrats need to thread this needle.

Keep ReadingShow less