Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

More felon voting rights on the agenda in Georgia

Voting lines

Some Georgia lawmakers support allowing those convicted of nonviolent felonies to be eligible to vote immediately after their release, while others favor giving the franchise back so quickly only to drug possession convicts.

Jessica McGowan/Getty Images

Georgia lawmakers are considering whether to make it easier for felons to vote.

A state Senate committee convened a hearing Friday to deliberate proposals for expanding voting rights for the state's 250,000 felons, particularly those convicted of nonviolent drug possession.

In Georgia, felons are eligible to re-register after finishing their sentences, completing parole, and paying all court fees and fines. Twenty-one other states have a similar model while 12 states bar felons from voting indefinitely.


At the hearing, some lawmakers signaled support for allowing those convicted of nonviolent felonies to be eligible to vote immediately after their release from prison, while others supported giving the franchise back so quickly only to drug possession convicts, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported.

The average length of probation in Georgia is nearly six and half years, according to testimony delivered at the hearing, which is almost double the national average. "It makes it so much harder for people who have heavy fines and fees to re-integrate into society," Sara Totonchi, executive director for the Southern Center for Human Rights, told lawmakers, asserting that restoring voting rights immediately to felons is one way to reduce recidivism.

The committee plans to meet two more times regarding felon voting rights before making a recommendation by the end of the year. There are dominant Republican majorities in both halves of the General Assembly.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Read More

A better direction for democracy reform

Denver election judge Eric Cobb carefully looks over ballots as counting continued on Nov. 6. Voters in Colorado rejected a ranked choice voting and open primaries measure.

Helen H. Richardson/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images

A better direction for democracy reform

Drutman is a senior fellow at New America and author "Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America."

This is the conclusion of a two-part, post-election series addressing the questions of what happened, why, what does it mean and what did we learn? Read part one.

I think there is a better direction for reform than the ranked choice voting and open primary proposals that were defeated on Election Day: combining fusion voting for single-winner elections with party-list proportional representation for multi-winner elections. This straightforward solution addresses the core problems voters care about: lack of choices, gerrymandering, lack of competition, etc., with a single transformative sweep.

Keep ReadingShow less
To-party doom loop
Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America

Let’s make sense of the election results

Drutman is a senior fellow at New America and author of "Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America."

Well, here are some of my takeaways from Election Day, and some other thoughts.

1. The two-party doom loop keeps getting doomier and loopier.

Keep ReadingShow less
Person voting in Denver

A proposal to institute ranked choice voting in Colorado was rejected by voters.

RJ Sangosti/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images

Despite setbacks, ranked choice voting will continue to grow

Mantell is director of communications for FairVote.

More than 3 million people across the nation voted for better elections through ranked choice voting on Election Day, as of current returns. Ranked choice voting is poised to win majority support in all five cities where it was on the ballot, most notably with an overwhelming win in Washington, D.C. – 73 percent to 27 percent.

Keep ReadingShow less
Electoral College map

It's possible Donald Trump and Kamala Harris could each get 269 electoral votes this year.

Electoral College rules are a problem. A worst-case tie may be ahead.

Johnson is the executive director of the Election Reformers Network, a national nonpartisan organization advancing common-sense reforms to protect elections from polarization. Keyssar is a Matthew W. Stirling Jr. professor of history and social policy at the Harvard Kennedy School. His work focuses on voting rights, electoral and political institutions, and the evolution of democracies.

It’s the worst-case presidential election scenario — a 269–269 tie in the Electoral College. In our hyper-competitive political era, such a scenario, though still unlikely, is becoming increasingly plausible, and we need to grapple with its implications.

Recent swing-state polling suggests a slight advantage for Kamala Harris in the Rust Belt, while Donald Trump leads in the Sun Belt. If the final results mirror these trends, Harris wins with 270 electoral votes. But should Trump take the single elector from Nebraska’s 2nd congressional district — won by Joe Biden in 2020 and Trump in 2016 — then both candidates would be deadlocked at 269.

Keep ReadingShow less