Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

$425 million to secure elections included in sprawling federal budget bill

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer

Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (above), kept the pressure on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell this fall and finally won his support for additional funding for election security.

Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

After months of testy standoffs and high-pressure bickering, congressional leaders have reached a bipartisan deal to spend $425 million to boost election security in the next year.

The funding is included in a $1.4 trillion government-wide spending package unveiled Monday and on course for swift approval. The Democratic-led House of Representatives voted for it Tuesday afternoon, with the Republican Senate assured of going along in time to ward off a partial government shutdown this weekend.

President Trump has signaled he'll sign the deal. Once that happens, the Election Assistance Commission can begin delivering a new round of grants to states laboring to make the voting tamper-proof in 2020. Government intelligence experts are unified in predicting the Russians will be joined by other foreign agents in seeking to hack into the country's several thousand different election systems next year.


The grants may be spent on buying voting equipment so long as the new system creates a paper record of every ballot cast, to implement post-election audits and for cyber security training, among other uses.

The funding comes on top of $380 million in grants Congress approved in March 2018.

Initially, many Republicans opposed any additional funding. They argued that some states had not spent their allocation from last year and they feared the money would lead to an eventual federal takeover of elections now run entirely by state and local governments. In addition, they believed enough has already been done to secure the 2020 elections.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell blocked security funding for months but faced tremendous pressure from advocacy groups, Democrats and others who said he was putting the credibility of the next presidential election at risk.

Special counsel Robert Mueller's report on Russian interference in the 2016 election found that operatives attempted to hack into voting systems around the country and were successful in gaining access to a voter registration database in Illinois and to computers used by some election officials in Florida.

McConnell's blanket opposition to all election security bills — partly driven by his not wanting to infuriate the president, who hates any suggestion his victory was tainted — prompted some critics to label the Kentucky Republican as "Moscow Mitch," an epithet he reviles. But he changed his mind in September after several of the nation's most prominent conservative groups came out in support of boosting federal spending against hacking.

By that time, the House had passed a spending bill with $600 million for election security. McConnell initially got behind an allocation of $250 million. In one of the final budget deal's reflections of the realities of a divided Congress, the final number neatly splits the difference.

Read More

Painting of people voting

"The County Election" by George Caleb Bingham

Sister democracies share an inherited flaw

Myers is executive director of the ProRep Coalition. Nickerson is executive director of Fair Vote Canada, a campaign for proportional representations (not affiliated with the U.S. reform organization FairVote.)

Among all advanced democracies, perhaps no two countries have a closer relationship — or more in common — than the United States and Canada. Our strong connection is partly due to geography: we share the longest border between any two countries and have a free trade agreement that’s made our economies reliant on one another. But our ties run much deeper than just that of friendly neighbors. As former British colonies, we’re siblings sharing a parent. And like actual siblings, whether we like it or not, we’ve inherited some of our parent’s flaws.

Keep ReadingShow less
Members of Congress standing next to a sign that reads "Americans Decide American Elections"
Sen. Mike Lee (left) and Speaker Mike Johnson conduct a news conference May 8 to introduce the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act.
Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Bill of the month: Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act

Rogers is the “data wrangler” at BillTrack50. He previously worked on policy in several government departments.

Last month, we looked at a bill to prohibit noncitizens from voting in Washington D.C. To continue the voting rights theme, this month IssueVoter and BillTrack50 are taking a look at the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act.

IssueVoter is a nonpartisan, nonprofit online platform dedicated to giving everyone a voice in our democracy. As part of its service, IssueVoter summarizes important bills passing through Congress and sets out the opinions for and against the legislation, helping us to better understand the issues.

BillTrack50 offers free tools for citizens to easily research legislators and bills across all 50 states and Congress. BillTrack50 also offers professional tools to help organizations with ongoing legislative and regulatory tracking, as well as easy ways to share information both internally and with the public.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump and Biden at the debate

Our political dysfunction was on display during the debate in the simple fact of the binary choice on stage: Trump vs Biden.

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

The debate, the political duopoly and the future of American democracy

Johnson is the executive director of the Election Reformers Network, a national nonpartisan organization advancing common-sense reforms to protect elections from polarization.

The talk is all about President Joe Biden’s recent debate performance, whether he’ll be replaced at the top of the ticket and what it all means for the very concerning likelihood of another Trump presidency. These are critical questions.

But Donald Trump is also a symptom of broader dysfunction in our political system. That dysfunction has two key sources: a toxic polarization that elevates cultural warfare over policymaking, and a set of rules that protects the major parties from competition and allows them too much control over elections. These rules entrench the major-party duopoly and preclude the emergence of any alternative political leadership, giving polarization in this country its increasingly existential character.

Keep ReadingShow less
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Voters should be able to take the measure of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., since he is poised to win millions of votes in November.

Andrew Lichtenstein/Getty Images

Kennedy should have been in the debate – and states need ranked voting

Richie is co-founder and senior advisor of FairVote.

CNN’s presidential debate coincided with a fresh batch of swing-state snapshots that make one thing perfectly clear: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. may be a longshot to be our 47th president and faces his own controversies, yet the 10 percent he’s often achieving in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada and other battlegrounds could easily tilt the presidency.

Why did CNN keep him out with impossible-to-meet requirements? The performances, mistruths and misstatements by Joe Biden and Donald Trump would have shocked Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas, who managed to debate seven times without any discussion of golf handicaps — a subject better fit for a “Grumpy Old Men” outtake than one of the year’s two scheduled debates.

Keep ReadingShow less
I Voted stickers

Veterans for All Voters advocates for election reforms that enable more people to participate in primaries.

BackyardProduction/Getty Images

Veterans are working to make democracy more representative

Proctor, a Navy veteran, is a volunteer with Veterans for All Voters.

Imagine this: A general election with no negative campaigning and four or five viable candidates (regardless of party affiliation) competing based on their own personal ideas and actions — not simply their level of obstruction or how well they demonize their opponents. In this reformed election process, the candidate with the best ideas and the broadest appeal will win. The result: The exhausted majority will finally be well-represented again.

Keep ReadingShow less