Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Election security experts keep up pressure for more cash

Illinois voters

Voting for president in 2016 in Illinois, where some of the most aggressive Russian hacking was attempted and the site of a congressional field hearing this week.

Scott Olson/Getty Images

As House and Senate negotiators determine how to reconcile a $350 million divide over election security spending, lawmakers headed to one of the Russian hackers' target states this week for a status report on Illinois' preparations for 2020.

While a number of states were targeted in 2016, the Illinois election system was among the most compromised, with black hats successfully gaining access to the voter registration database and positioning themselves to manipulate the data. Investigators found no evidence of any records being altered.

Illinois election officials told members of the House Homeland Security Committee on Tuesday that the state has improved its digital security but more needs to be done to block future hackers.


"Cybersecurity is an ongoing, ever-escalating process that doesn't have an end date, and as such there will be an ongoing need for funds to maintain the program," state Board of Elections Director Steve Sandvoss said at the field hearing in the Chicago suburb if Gurnee, Capitol News Illinois reported.

Sandvoss updated the committee on Cyber Navigator, a new program in which the state uses a $13.2 million federal grant to provide election security support to local officials throughout Illinois. Lake County Clerk Robin O'Connor expressed gratitude for the support but stressed that more needs to be done.

"The threat of election interference, we believe, all of us who are here, is constant and requires proactive monitoring," she said.

In June, the House voted to allocate $600 million to helping the states improve their election security in the year before the election. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, after stonewalling all election security legislation throughout the summer, relented in September and allowed the Senate to pass $250 million in spending to protect election systems.

The Democratic-led House and Republican-controlled Senate must now negotiate a compromise.

"We know what we need to do to harden our infrastructure, but we're lacking in leadership and funding," Elizabeth Howard, counsel for the Brennan Center for Justice's Democracy Program, told the committee.

She believes the United States needs to spend more than $2 billion to properly protect our election systems.

Read More

Independent Voters Just Got Power in Nevada – if the Governor Lets It Happen

"On Las Vegas Boulevard" sign.

Photo by Wesley Tingey on Unsplash. Unplash+ license obtained by IVN Editor Shawn Griffiths.

Independent Voters Just Got Power in Nevada – if the Governor Lets It Happen

CARSON CITY, NEV. - A surprise last-minute bill to open primary elections to Nevada’s largest voting bloc, registered unaffiliated voters, moved quickly through the state legislature and was approved by a majority of lawmakers on the last day of the legislative session Monday.

The bill, AB597, allows voters not registered with a political party to pick between a Republican and Democratic primary ballot in future election cycles. It does not apply to the state’s presidential preference elections, which would remain closed to registered party members.

Keep ReadingShow less
Voter registration

In April 2025, the SAVE Act has been reintroduced in the 119th Congress and passed the House, with a much stronger chance of becoming law given the current political landscape.

SDI Productions

The SAVE Act: Addressing a Non-Existent Problem at the Cost of Voter Access?

In July 2024, I wrote about the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act when it was first introduced in Congress. And Sarah and I discussed it in an episode of Beyond the Bill Number which you can still listen to. Now, in April 2025, the SAVE Act has been reintroduced in the 119th Congress and passed the House, with a much stronger chance of becoming law given the current political landscape. It's time to revisit this legislation and examine its implications for American voters.

Read the IssueVoter analysis of the bill here for further insight and commentary.

Keep ReadingShow less
Independent Voters Gain Ground As New Mexico Opens Primaries
person in blue denim jeans and white sneakers standing on gray concrete floor
Photo by Phil Scroggs on Unsplash

Independent Voters Gain Ground As New Mexico Opens Primaries

With the stroke of a pen, New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham enfranchised almost 350,000 independent voters recently by signing a bill for open primaries. Just a few years ago, bills to open the primaries were languishing in the state legislature, as they have historically across the country. But as more and more voters leave both parties and declare their independence, the political system is buckling. And as independents begin to organize and speak out, it’s going to continue to buckle in their direction.

In 2004, there were 120,000 independent voters in New Mexico. A little over 10 years later, when the first open primary bill was introduced, that number had more than doubled. That bill never even got a hearing. But today the number of independents in New Mexico and across the country is too big to ignore. Independents are the largest group of voters in ten states and the second-largest in most others. That’s putting tremendous pressure on a system that wasn’t designed with them in mind.

Keep ReadingShow less
"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