Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

All will get Connecticut vote-by-mail applications, but most don't qualify

Connecticut Secretary of State Denise Merrill

Secretary of State Denise Merrill plans to send out absentee ballot applications to all 2.2 million registered voters in Connecticut.

Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Connecticut will send a ballot-by-mail application to every registered voter, but for now only a relative handful in the state are legally allowed to complete the form.

Democratic Secretary of State Denise Merrill promised the mailing Monday as part of a multifaceted plan to make voting safer and easier during the coronavirus pandemic. But the state has strict limits on who may vote absentee, and the law does not suggest that fear of exposure to a potentially fatal virus is an acceptable reason for not going to the polls in person.

Connecticut is the only blue state among just six that have not yet modified or abandoned such excuse requirements during the Covid-19 outbreak. Unless that happens, there's little reason to expect much more than 6 percent of the electorate — the share of the vote cast by mail statewide two years ago — will have a legal claim to vote from home this year.


"My illness" is one of the six allowable reasons listed on the form for getting an absentee ballot — along with being disabled, a poll worker, on active military duty, out of town or having to restrict travel for religious reasons.

Merrill told reporters that, while she has the authority to declare that fear of the coronavirus is covered by the illness option, she would like Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont or the Democratic-majority General Assembly to take the lead in declaring such an excuse is allowable — and for how long.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

"I am completely sympathetic to the issues that people have," she said. "I think it's unconscionable that we would make people decide their health versus their vote."

Lamont said he could potentially expand absentee voting for the Aug. 11 presidential, legislative and congressional primaries through an executive order. But his emergency executive powers expire in September, so changes for the general election would be up to the Legislature. It has adjourned because of the pandemic but is expected to reconvene this summer for a special session.

Sixteen states normally require an excuse to vote absentee, but 10 have either temporarily suspended or expanded their qualification criteria to include the widespread public health concerns.

The federal government allocated $5 million to Connecticut from among $400 million in congressionally approved grants for making this year's election safer, and Merrill says the state will use the bulk of the money for mailing out the absentee ballot applications to the state's 2.2 million voters along with postage-paid return envelopes.

She says she also has the money to recruit and train general election poll workers and launch a public awareness campaign. Townships in the state are in charge of administering elections and bear much of the costs.

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