Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Arkansas redistricting reform blocked from November ballot

Arkansas
FotografiaBasica/Getty Images

The Arkansas Supreme Court on Thursday blocked a redistricting reform measure from the November ballot, dashing the hopes of anti-gerrymandering advocates who hoped to achieve multiple wins this fall.

Siding with Republican Secretary of State John Thurston, the high court rejected the petition submitted last month by Arkansas Voters First because of an error with the state-mandated criminal background checks for petition canvassers.

That leaves Virginia as the only state left with a redistricting reform measure on the ballot. Reformers in other states had pushed anti-gerrymandering initiatives this year, but they ultimately fell short of signature thresholds or were defeated in court. These campaigns represented the last change for meaningful change until 2030, as states will begin their decennial mapmaking process next year.


The Arkansas ruling comes on the heals of North Dakota's Supreme Court scrapping a ballot measure that would have ended gerrymandering in the Legislature. Advocates in these and other states are now forced to look to the future.

While Arkansas Voters First is still evaluating its next steps, Chairwoman Bonnie Miller said she "will not stop fighting for fair maps in Arkansas."

"I'm not giving up hope for a more representative democracy in our state," she said. "The power and authority to draw maps should be vested with the voters — not politicians and lobbyists."

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

An anti-gerrymandering effort in Oregon were also blocked in the courts, and a campaign in Nevada fell short of the required signatures because the coronavirus pandemic made canvassing especially difficult.

A redistricting measure is on the ballot in Missouri, but if approved by voters, it would undo a reform initiative implemented two years ago.

After Arkansas Voters First turned in signatures for its petition in July, Thurston determined the submission was insufficient because the campaign's canvassers did not certify they passed background checks. But Miller argues the canvassers were in compliance with state law.

"The court had the opportunity to side with the people as the canvassers had clearly complied with the statute, but instead chose to refuse their rights by a thin technicality," Miller said. "We are very disappointed in this ruling and are evaluating our legal options."

Currently, Arkansas' congressional maps are drawn by the GOP-majority Legislature, and the legislative maps are determined by the governor, attorney general and secretary of state — all Republicans.

If the redistricting measure had been successful, it would have put a nine-member nonpartisan commission in charge of redrawing Arkansas legislative and congressional maps each decade.

"Surveys from earlier this year show that when given the opportunity, Arkansans want to end the control of redistricting by politicians behind closed doors and replace it with a fair, nonpartisan and open process," Miller said.

Read More

"Voter Here" sign outside of a polling location.

"Voter Here" sign outside of a polling location.

Getty Images, Grace Cary

Stopping the Descent Toward Banana Republic Elections

President Trump’s election-related executive order begins by pointing out practices in Canada, Sweden, Brazil, and elsewhere that outperform the U.S. But it is Trump’s order itself that really demonstrates how far we’ve fallen behind. In none of the countries mentioned, or any other major democracy in the world, would the head of government change election rules by decree, as Trump has tried to do.

Trump is the leader of a political party that will fight for control of Congress in 2026, an election sure to be close, and important to his presidency. The leader of one side in such a competition has no business unilaterally changing its rules—that’s why executive decrees changing elections only happen in tinpot dictatorships, not democracies.

Keep ReadingShow less
"Vote" pin.
Getty Images, William Whitehurst

Most Americans’ Votes Don’t Matter in Deciding Elections

New research from the Unite America Institute confirms a stark reality: Most ballots cast in American elections don’t matter in deciding the outcome. In 2024, just 14% of eligible voters cast a meaningful vote that actually influenced the outcome of a U.S. House race. For state house races, on average across all 50 states, just 13% cast meaningful votes.

“Too many Americans have no real say in their democracy,” said Unite America Executive Director Nick Troiano. “Every voter deserves a ballot that not only counts, but that truly matters. We should demand better than ‘elections in name only.’”

Keep ReadingShow less
Why America’s Elections Will Never Be the Same After Trump
text
Photo by Dan Dennis on Unsplash

Why America’s Elections Will Never Be the Same After Trump

Donald Trump wasted no time when he returned to the White House. Within hours, he signed over 200 executive orders, rapidly dismantling years of policy and consolidating control with the stroke of a pen. But the frenzy of reversals was only the surface. Beneath it lies a deeper, more troubling transformation: presidential elections have become all-or-nothing battles, where the victor rewrites the rules of government and the loser’s agenda is annihilated.

And it’s not just the orders. Trump’s second term has unleashed sweeping deportations, the purging of federal agencies, and a direct assault on the professional civil service. With the revival of Schedule F, regulatory rollbacks, and the targeting of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs, the federal bureaucracy is being rigged to serve partisan ideology. Backing him is a GOP-led Congress, too cowardly—or too complicit—to assert its constitutional authority.

Keep ReadingShow less
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