Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Price tag for coronavirus election changes put at $2 billion

Voting changes

More drop off boxes, like this one being used by a Denver voter on Super Tuesday, are among the improvements that the Brennan Center is proposing in response to the Coronavirus pandemic.

Michael Ciaglo/Getty Images

Given the myriad differences in election methods across the country, changing the way Americans vote in the time of coronavirus won't be easy. And it wouldn't be cheap, either.

The Brennan Center for Justice on Thursday said it would cost as much as $2 billion to implement the ambitious changes it recommends for a November election in which every voter can vote free of the fear of infection. Expanded online voter registration, a nationwide option to vote by mail and public safeguards at polling places are at the heart of the liberal think tank's detailed plan.


Arranging for everyone to be able to cast a ballot from home is by far the most expensive item, with a price tag between $982 million to $1.4 billion. The breakdown for this includes:

  • $413 million to $593 million for postage to mail the ballots to about 155 million registered voters — and the cost of that many postage-paid return envelopes.
  • $127 million to $164 million to install and operate drop boxes where people could deposit ballots if they wait until the last minute or don't trust the mail.
  • $120 million to $240 million to buy equipment to manage the increase in absentee ballots — including signature verification technology, high-volume sorting machines and high-speed ballot scanners.
  • $165 million for the additional people states and counties would have to hire to run that equipment and otherwise sort and count all the ballots.
  • $92 million for election officials to rent extra space for storing and then processing the incoming ocean of paper.
  • $54 million to $89 million to print the ballots and return envelopes.

Since millions of people will still want to vote in person, the Brennan Center says, $271 million will be needed to ensure that polling places meet health standards, increase the number of poll workers and expand the days that polling sites are open.

Responding to the Covid-19 pandemic, which could require all Americans to avoid most public gathering places for months, will also require $86 million for an expansion of online voter registration in states where the rules now compel people to appear in person at a government office, especially close to Election Day.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Communicating all of these changes to an already stressed and confused public is the last major element in the Brennan Center proposal. An estimated $252 million would be spent on voter education campaigns to let people know about the mail-in voting options and the expanded online voter registration opportunities.

Legislation introduced in the Senate this week by Democrats Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Ron Wyden of Oregon includes many of the ideas the Brennan Center recommends. It is an opening bid by the senators, who are hoping to secure bipartisan support for including in the $1 trillion coronavirus economic stimulus package a generous federal subsidy for easing the health concerns about voting this year — principally by boosting the use of mail-in ballots.

It requires that the federal government reimburse states for the costs of implementing these changes, such as providing free postage for absentee ballots. But it does not provide an estimate of how much that reimbursement might total.

The only dollar figure in the legislation is $3 million that would be directed to the Election Assistance Commission to allow it to help administer the voting system changes.

Read More

Members of Congress in the House of Representatives

Every four years, Congress gathers to count electoral votes.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

No country still uses an electoral college − except the U.S.

Holzer is an associate professor of political science at Westminster College.

The United States is the only democracy in the world where a presidential candidate can get the most popular votes and still lose the election. Thanks to the Electoral College, that has happened five times in the country’s history. The most recent examples are from 2000, when Al Gore won the popular vote but George W. Bush won the Electoral College after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, and 2016, when Hillary Clinton got more votes nationwide than Donald Trump but lost in the Electoral College.

The Founding Fathers did not invent the idea of an electoral college. Rather, they borrowed the concept from Europe, where it had been used to pick emperors for hundreds of years.

Keep ReadingShow less
Nebraska Capitol

Nebraska's Capitol houses a unicameral legislature, unique in American politics.

Education Images/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

100 years ago, a Nebraska Republican fought for democracy reform

Gruber is senior vice president of Open Primaries.

With Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen’s announcement on Sept. 24 that he doesn't have enough votes to call a special session of the Legislature to change the way the state allocates electoral votes, an effort led by former President Donald Trump to pressure the Legislature officially failed.

Nebraska is one of only two states that award a single Electoral College vote to the winner in each congressional district, plus two votes to the statewide winner of the presidential popular vote. Much has been made — justifiably — of Republican state Sen. Mike McDonnell’s heroic decision to buck enormous political pressure from his party to fall in line, and choosing instead to single-handedly defeat the measure. The origins of the senator's independence, though, began in a 100-old experiment in democracy reform.

Keep ReadingShow less
Man sitting in a chair near voting stations

An election official staffs a voting location in Lansing, Mich., during the state's Aug. 6, primary.

Emily Elconin for The Washington Post via Getty Images

Closed primaries, gerrymandering eliminate competition for House seats

Meyers is executive editor of The Fulcrum.

There are 435 voting members of the House of Representatives. But few of those districts — 55, to be exact — will be decided on Election Day, according to new data from the nonprofit organization Unite America. That’s because the vast majority of races were effectively decided during the primaries.

The research data goes deep into what Unite America calls the “Primary Problem,” in which few Americans are determining winners of House elections.

Keep ReadingShow less
House chamber

Rep. Scott Perry objects to Pennsylvania's certification of its Electoral College vote during a joint session of Congress on Jan. 7, 2021.

Kent Nishimura/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

What voters need to know about the presidential election

Becvar is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and executive director of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund. Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

It is quite clear that the presidential election is going to be incredibly close. In each of the seven swing states, the margin of error is less than 2 percent.

As citizens, this is not something to fear and it is critically important that we all trust the election results.

As part of our ongoing series for the Election Overtime Project, today we present a guide explaining in detail what you, as a voter, need to know about the role of state legislatures and Congress in a presidential election. The guide was prepared by the Election Reformers Network, a nonprofit organization championing impartial elections and concrete policy solutions that strengthen American democracy.

Keep ReadingShow less