Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

S.C. will allow Covid fear as an excuse to vote absentee

South Carolina and coronavirus
Stock Ninja Studio/Getty Images

South Carolina is relaxing its strict limits on absentee voting, allowing fear of exposure to the coronavirus as an acceptable reason for voting from home — at least for the primary.

When Gov. Henry McMaster signs the legislation, pushed through the General Assembly by his fellow Republicans on Tuesday, just five states will be holding fast to their normally restrictive excuse requirements despite the pandemic.

Lawsuits and lobbying campaigns are pressing to get the laws relaxed in time for primaries in all of them: Texas, Mississippi, Missouri, Tennessee and Connecticut. And South Carolina legislators acted just hours after such a suit was argued before the state Supreme Court.


Another 10 states that normally require voters to list a reason for avoiding the voting booth have either waived the rules or decided the risk of Covid-19 fulfills the absentee voting exemption for people who are ill.

South Carolina's switch may have minimal effect, because it will expire before November and therefore will only cover what looks to be a relatively low-turnout, minimally competitive set of congressional and legislative nominating contests June 9.

Sponsors of the bill also said that, since the state does not require voters to back up their use of one of the 15 absentee balloting excuses with supporting documents like doctors' notes or travel receipts, they assume many voters have already checked the illness box on the application form.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

They said they were mainly worried by a state Election Commission report that hundreds of poll workers — who are primarily elderly and therefore most at risk of viral infection — were no longer willing to work, causing the potential for long lines of not-very-socially-distanced voters on primary day.

Four weeks before the primary, the day the bill cleared, almost 92,000 absentee ballots had been requested — 50 percent more than the number two years ago. That year, just 4 percent of all votes were mailed in, while nationwide the number was 24 percent.

Read More

One Lesson from the Elections: Looking At Universal Voting

A roll of "voted" stickers.

Pexels, Element5 Digital

One Lesson from the Elections: Looking At Universal Voting

The analysis and parsing of learned lessons from the 2024 elections will continue for a long time. What did the campaigns do right and wrong? What policies will emerge from the new arrangements of power? What do the parties need to do for the future?

An equally important question is what lessons are there for our democratic structures and processes. One positive lesson is that voting itself was almost universally smooth and effective; we should applaud the election officials who made that happen. But, many elements of the 2024 elections are deeply challenging, from the increasingly outsized role of billionaires in the process to the onslaught of misinformation and disinformation.

Keep ReadingShow less
MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

A check mark and hands.

Photo by Allison Saeng on Unsplash. Unsplash+ License obtained by the author.

MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

Originally published by Independent Voter News.

Today, I am proud to share an exciting milestone in my journey as an advocate for democracy and electoral reform.

Keep ReadingShow less
Half-Baked Alaska

A photo of multiple checked boxes.

Getty Images / Thanakorn Lappattaranan

Half-Baked Alaska

This past year’s elections saw a number of state ballot initiatives of great national interest, which proposed the adoption of two “unusual” election systems for state and federal offices. Pairing open nonpartisan primaries with a general election using ranked choice voting, these reforms were rejected by the citizens of Colorado, Idaho, and Nevada. The citizens of Alaska, however, who were the first to adopt this dual system in 2020, narrowly confirmed their choice after an attempt to repeal it in November.

Ranked choice voting, used in Alaska’s general elections, allows voters to rank their candidate choices on their ballot and then has multiple rounds of voting until one candidate emerges with a majority of the final vote and is declared the winner. This more representative result is guaranteed because in each round the weakest candidate is dropped, and the votes of that candidate’s supporters automatically transfer to their next highest choice. Alaska thereby became the second state after Maine to use ranked choice voting for its state and federal elections, and both have had great success in their use.

Keep ReadingShow less
Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

The United States Supreme Court.

Getty Images / Rudy Sulgan

Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

Fourteen years ago, after the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the popular blanket primary system, Californians voted to replace the deeply unpopular closed primary that replaced it with a top-two system. Since then, Democratic Party insiders, Republican Party insiders, minor political parties, and many national reform and good government groups, have tried (and failed) to deep-six the system because the public overwhelmingly supports it (over 60% every year it’s polled).

Now, three minor political parties, who opposed the reform from the start and have unsuccessfully sued previously, are once again trying to overturn it. The Peace and Freedom Party, the Green Party, and the Libertarian Party have teamed up to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Their brief repeats the same argument that the courts have previously rejected—that the top-two system discriminates against parties and deprives voters of choice by not guaranteeing every party a place on the November ballot.

Keep ReadingShow less