Skip to content
Project 2025
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories
Trump’s Deepfake Isn’t Just Offensive—It’s a Racist Distraction from Real Governance

Trump’s Deepfake Isn’t Just Offensive—It’s a Racist Distraction from Real Governance

Is Pritzker Right? Is It Time To Invoke the 25th Amendment Against Trump?

Is Pritzker Right? Is It Time To Invoke the 25th Amendment Against Trump?

Donald Trump

Project 2025 in Action: Sounding the Alarm for Democracy

A man standing and tilting a seesaw, with a crowd of people standing on the other side.

This Nation’s First Dictatorship Is Emerging. It Is Time To Call It What It Is.

Pope Leo XIV’s Rebuke of U.S. Immigration Policy Is a Wake-Up Call

Pope Leo XIV’s Rebuke of U.S. Immigration Policy Is a Wake-Up Call

Arizona will upgrade voter registration services to settle a lawsuit

Arizona will upgrade voter registration services to settle a lawsuit

Arizona must upgrade its systems this month because it had not been in compliance with federal law that requires states update voter registration information when a person changes their address on a driver's license or state-issued ID card.

Hailshadow/Getty Images
The Fulcrum
By The FulcrumJan 08, 2020
The Fulcrum
The Fulcrum staff.
See More Writings by author

Arizona has agreed to improve its voter registration services as part of a lawsuit settlement reached with voting rights groups.

The arrangement, announced Monday, could boost turnout in one of the nation's fastest growing and politically competitive states, where this fall both parties will be hotly contesting not only nine electoral votes in the presidential race but also a Senate seat and at least three House races.

The complaint filed two years ago against the Arizona's secretary of state's office and transportation department alleged the state has been violating the federal motor-voter law for years — by not updating a person's voter registration information when they changed their address on their driver's license or state-issued ID card.

At a September 2018 court hearing, the secretary of state's office acknowledged that nearly 400,000 Arizonans likely had an incorrect address on their registration records due to the state's failure to update the information in accordance with the 1993 law.

An incorrect address on a registration form not only jeopardizes a person's chances of casting a ballot on Election Day but also makes it less likely they will receive a mail-in ballot form ahead of time — a crucial driver of turnout in a state where about three-fourths of voters cast ballots that way.

The settlement, which requires the state to upgrade its computer databases and electronic communications by the end of the month, was hailed as a win by voting rights advocates, including the League of Women Voters of Arizona, which joined Mi Familia Vota Education Fund and Promise Arizona as plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

"With this agreement, all qualified voters in Arizona can be certain that their address for voter registration has been updated when they change their address through the Motor Vehicle Department," Robyn Prud'homme-Bauer, a former LWV of Arizona co-president, said in a statement. "We applaud the Secretary of State and ADOT for helping Arizona close a gap in compliance of the National Voter Registration Act."

Latest news

From Fragility to Resilience: Fixing America’s Economic and Political Fault Lines
Governance & Legislation

From Fragility to Resilience: Fixing America’s Economic and Political Fault Lines

America’s Boiling Frog
Opinion

America’s Boiling Frog

The Loneliest Rooms on the Maternity Ward
Opinion

The Loneliest Rooms on the Maternity Ward

Read More

U.S. President Barack Obama speaking on the phone in the Oval Office.

U.S. President Barack Obama talks President Barack Obama talks with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan during a phone call from the Oval Office on November 2, 2009 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, The White House

‘Obama, You're 15 Years Too Late!’

The mid-decade redistricting fight continues, while the word “hypocrisy” has become increasingly common in the media.

The origin of mid-decade redistricting dates back to the early history of the United States. However, its resurgence and legal acceptance primarily stem from the Texas redistricting effort in 2003, a controversial move by the Republican Party to redraw the state's congressional districts, and the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court decision in League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry. This decision, which confirmed that mid-decade redistricting is not prohibited by federal law, was a significant turning point in the acceptance of this practice.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand of a person casting a ballot at a polling station during voting.

Gerrymandering silences communities and distorts elections. Proportional representation offers a proven path to fairer maps and real democracy.

Getty Images, bizoo_n

Gerrymandering Today, Gerrymandering Tomorrow, Gerrymandering Forever

In 1963, Alabama Governor George Wallace declared, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." (Watch the video of his speech.) As a politically aware high school senior, I was shocked by the venom and anger in his voice—the open, defiant embrace of systematic disenfranchisement, so different from the quieter racism I knew growing up outside Boston.

Today, watching politicians openly rig elections, I feel that same disbelief—especially seeing Republican leaders embrace that same systematic approach: gerrymandering now, gerrymandering tomorrow, gerrymandering forever.

Keep ReadingShow less
An oversized ballot box surrounded by people.

Young people worldwide form new parties to reshape politics—yet America’s two-party system blocks them.

Getty Images, J Studios

No Country for Young Politicians—and How To Fix That

In democracies around the world, young people have started new political parties whenever the establishment has sidelined their views or excluded them from policymaking. These parties have sometimes reinvigorated political competition, compelled established parties to take previously neglected issues seriously, or encouraged incumbent leaders to find better ways to include and reach out to young voters.

In Europe, a trio in their twenties started Volt in 2017 as a pan-European response to Brexit, and the party has managed to win seats in the European Parliament and in some national legislatures. In Germany, young people concerned about climate change created Klimaliste, a party committed to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as per the Paris Agreement. Although the party hasn’t won seats at the federal level, they have managed to win some municipal elections. In Chile, leaders of the 2011 student protests, who then won seats as independent candidates, created political parties like Revolución Democrática and Convergencia Social to institutionalize their movements. In 2022, one of these former student leaders, Gabriel Boric, became the president of Chile at 36 years old.

Keep ReadingShow less
How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

Demonstrators gather outside of The United States Supreme Court during an oral arguments in Gill v. Whitford to call for an end to partisan gerrymandering on October 3, 2017 in Washington, DC

Getty Images, Olivier Douliery

How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground. ~ Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Col. Edward Carrington, Paris, 27 May 1788

The Problem We Face

The U.S. House of Representatives was designed as the chamber of Congress most directly tethered to the people. Article I of the Constitution mandates that seats be apportioned among the states according to population and that members face election every two years—design features meant to keep representatives responsive to shifting public sentiment. Unlike the Senate, which prioritizes state sovereignty and representation, the House translates raw population counts into political voice: each House district is to contain roughly the same number of residents, ensuring that every citizen’s vote carries comparable weight. In principle, then, the House serves as the nation’s demographic mirror, channeling the diverse preferences of the electorate into lawmaking and acting as a safeguard against unresponsive or oligarchic governance.

Nationally, the mismatch between the overall popular vote and the partisan split in House seats is small, with less than a 1% tilt. But state-level results tell a different story. Take Connecticut: Democrats hold all five seats despite Republicans winning over 40% of the statewide vote. In Oklahoma, the inverse occurs—Republicans control every seat even though Democrats consistently earn around 40% of the vote.

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2025