Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Florida sees no evidence of the 2018 vote fraud Trump asserted

Florida election officials

Election officials in Palm Beach pore over ballots during one of the 2018 recounts.

Saul Martinez/Getty Images

Florida's top criminal investigators have found "no evidence of fraudulent intent" by the Democrats after a year-long probe into allegations of mail-in-vote tampering during the last election.

The conclusion by the Department of Law Enforcement prompted the state's top prosecutor to declare Wednesday that a "lack of sufficient evidence to support prosecution" brings to a close one of the most prominent election corruption disputes in years in the state's biggest purple state.

It also punctures a major talking point from President Trump as he's ratcheted up his campaign against expanding absentee voting this year in response to the coronavirus crisis. He has claimed there was fraud in the 2018 Florida election, where the margins in both top races were so thin as to require statewide recounts.


Republicans ended up winning both contests, Ron DeSantis becoming governor and Rick Scott joining the Senate.

Investigators found three people associated with the Florida Democratic Party had changed the deadline dates on an election form used to fix signature problems on mailed-in ballots.

When reviewing mailed-in ballots, election officials compare the signature on the envelope with the voters' signature on file. If they do not look like a match, the ballot is not counted unless the voter completes a document verifying the document's authenticity

Democrats had complained about the number of ballots rejected, saying there were no standards or training for people to make fair signature match determinations. Democrats have raised the same issue in lawsuits filed across the country hoping to end handwriting analysis disputes in closely contested states in November.

The investigation determined people were preparing the altered forms in anticipation of a favorable court ruling in a lawsuit filed by Democrats challenging votes rejected for perceived signature flaws — and had no intent to circulate them until after the ruling.

When vote totals, especially in the Democratic strongholds of Palm Beach and Broward counties, started reducing GOP margins as mail-in votes were tallied two years ago, Trump tweeted that "Law Enforcement is looking into another big corruption scandal having to do with Election Fraud" and that, while Democrats had dispatched "their best Election stealing lawyer" to the state, "Don't worry, Florida - I am sending much better lawyers to expose the FRAUD!"

While such claims of voter fraud are increasingly frequent from the GOP, actual prosecutions are rare. One happened in Philadelphia on Thursday, however: A former elections judge pleaded guilty to taking bribes in return for secretly entering voting booths and running up the totals for local candidates from 2014 to 2016 to add votes for three Democratic judicial candidates. Domenick DeMuro faces 15 years in prison and a $500,000 fine.

Read More

U.S. President Barack Obama speaking on the phone in the Oval Office.

U.S. President Barack Obama talks President Barack Obama talks with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan during a phone call from the Oval Office on November 2, 2009 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, The White House

‘Obama, You're 15 Years Too Late!’

The mid-decade redistricting fight continues, while the word “hypocrisy” has become increasingly common in the media.

The origin of mid-decade redistricting dates back to the early history of the United States. However, its resurgence and legal acceptance primarily stem from the Texas redistricting effort in 2003, a controversial move by the Republican Party to redraw the state's congressional districts, and the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court decision in League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry. This decision, which confirmed that mid-decade redistricting is not prohibited by federal law, was a significant turning point in the acceptance of this practice.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand of a person casting a ballot at a polling station during voting.

Gerrymandering silences communities and distorts elections. Proportional representation offers a proven path to fairer maps and real democracy.

Getty Images, bizoo_n

Gerrymandering Today, Gerrymandering Tomorrow, Gerrymandering Forever

In 1963, Alabama Governor George Wallace declared, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." (Watch the video of his speech.) As a politically aware high school senior, I was shocked by the venom and anger in his voice—the open, defiant embrace of systematic disenfranchisement, so different from the quieter racism I knew growing up outside Boston.

Today, watching politicians openly rig elections, I feel that same disbelief—especially seeing Republican leaders embrace that same systematic approach: gerrymandering now, gerrymandering tomorrow, gerrymandering forever.

Keep ReadingShow less
An oversized ballot box surrounded by people.

Young people worldwide form new parties to reshape politics—yet America’s two-party system blocks them.

Getty Images, J Studios

No Country for Young Politicians—and How To Fix That

In democracies around the world, young people have started new political parties whenever the establishment has sidelined their views or excluded them from policymaking. These parties have sometimes reinvigorated political competition, compelled established parties to take previously neglected issues seriously, or encouraged incumbent leaders to find better ways to include and reach out to young voters.

In Europe, a trio in their twenties started Volt in 2017 as a pan-European response to Brexit, and the party has managed to win seats in the European Parliament and in some national legislatures. In Germany, young people concerned about climate change created Klimaliste, a party committed to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as per the Paris Agreement. Although the party hasn’t won seats at the federal level, they have managed to win some municipal elections. In Chile, leaders of the 2011 student protests, who then won seats as independent candidates, created political parties like Revolución Democrática and Convergencia Social to institutionalize their movements. In 2022, one of these former student leaders, Gabriel Boric, became the president of Chile at 36 years old.

Keep ReadingShow less
How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

Demonstrators gather outside of The United States Supreme Court during an oral arguments in Gill v. Whitford to call for an end to partisan gerrymandering on October 3, 2017 in Washington, DC

Getty Images, Olivier Douliery

How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground. ~ Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Col. Edward Carrington, Paris, 27 May 1788

The Problem We Face

The U.S. House of Representatives was designed as the chamber of Congress most directly tethered to the people. Article I of the Constitution mandates that seats be apportioned among the states according to population and that members face election every two years—design features meant to keep representatives responsive to shifting public sentiment. Unlike the Senate, which prioritizes state sovereignty and representation, the House translates raw population counts into political voice: each House district is to contain roughly the same number of residents, ensuring that every citizen’s vote carries comparable weight. In principle, then, the House serves as the nation’s demographic mirror, channeling the diverse preferences of the electorate into lawmaking and acting as a safeguard against unresponsive or oligarchic governance.

Nationally, the mismatch between the overall popular vote and the partisan split in House seats is small, with less than a 1% tilt. But state-level results tell a different story. Take Connecticut: Democrats hold all five seats despite Republicans winning over 40% of the statewide vote. In Oklahoma, the inverse occurs—Republicans control every seat even though Democrats consistently earn around 40% of the vote.

Keep ReadingShow less