Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Connecticut joins most states in relaxing excuse rules for absentee voting

Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont

Following Gov. Ned Lamont's executive order, Texas, Tennessee, Mississippi and Missouri are the only states keeping strict limits on mail ballots for the primaries.

Bonnie Biess/Getty Images

Reliably blue Connecticut will allow everyone to vote remotely this summer. Its relaxation of the usual excuse requirements because of the coronavirus leaves only a quartet of red states holding fast to their strict limitations on using an absentee ballot.

Under an executive order Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont signed Wednesday, fear of exposure to the virus will be a valid reason for voting remotely.

Lawsuits are hoping to force the same result in Texas, Tennessee, Mississippi and Missouri, where Republicans run the state governments and are fighting calls to make remote voting universally available until the pandemic ends. Eleven states before Connecticut, five of them under GOP control, had come up with legislative or administrative workarounds to that effect.


All those states have concluded their governing priority is minimizing the risks to both voters and election workers if they are compelled to spend long stretches in close proximity at polling places — a situation that prompted more than 50 people to become sick after waiting in line to vote in Wisconsin's primaries last month.

Lamont's easement applies only to the Aug. 11 primaries, which will feature a Democratic presidential contest postponed from April and the regularly scheduled nominating contests for Congress and the Legislature. And his order says the old rules will apply if a "federally approved and widely available vaccine for Covid-19" is somehow available by then — which almost no one thinks is possible.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

State law normally allows only people who are sick, disabled, out of town or face a religious conflict to vote absentee. And that will be the case again for the general election unless the Legislature returns in time to alter the law before Nov. 3.

Lamont had resisted calls to use his powers for months, relenting when it became clear lawmakers would not come back to Hartford before late summer.

"We must guarantee access to the ballot," he said in announcing his order. "I do not take this decision lightly, and it is with the public health and welfare of residents in mind."

Three weeks ago, Secretary of the State Denise Merrill announced she would send absentee ballot applications for the primary to every registered voter — an effort that was largely pointless until Lamont stepped in. The usual rules have meant fewer than 10 percent of votes statewide have been cast absentee.

Mail has been the only option for those ballots until now. At a time when postal service has slowed considerably, the state will use some of its share of the $400 million in federal election grants to provide secure drop boxes to each of its municipalities.

Senate Republican Leader Len Fasano said the equipment would be an invitation to fraud, asserting without evidence that they "present unique security issues related to stuffing ballot boxes."

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