Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Pa.'s elections boss says democracy reform, voter security can coexist

Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar

Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar signs a ceremonial petition in the state Capitol last summer, celebrating the 100th anniversary of the state's ratification of the 19th Amendment granting women the right to vote.

Pennsylvania Department of State

Kathy Boockvar has been Pennsylvania's secretary of state only 14 months, but she comes by her passion for elections honestly: She was a poll worker as a young adult, spent years practicing voting rights law, ran a credible race for Congress in 2012 and advised Gov. Tom Wolf, a fellow Democrat, on the most comprehensive overhaul of the state's elections laws in more than 80 years.

That experience has given her something to say about the state of democracy reform and election security eight months ahead of the presidential election.


Pennsylvania's law, enacted last fall, has brought no-excuse absentee voting by mail to the state, permits voters to sign up to receive such ballots in every election, created a 50-day period for early voting by mail, lengthened the pre-election period for registration by 15 days and paid for the installation of new voting equipment in all of the state's 67 counties.

What's as remarkable as the statute's breadth is that it resulted from the sort of negotiation and bipartisan compromise that are extremely rare in American government today. Harrisburg is among just nine state capitals where the governor is not from the same party in control of the legislature. But Wolf and Republican leaders in the state House and Senate were able to strike a deal in which GOP lawmakers got their top wish — the elimination of straight-ticket voting, which they say unfairly favored Democrats — and the governor's side got a package making it easier to vote.

Boockver also co-chairs the Election Committee of the National Association of Secretaries of State. It was in that role that she came to Washington last week. During a break in her time at a National Association of Counties conference, she discussed democracy reform's triumph in Pennsylvania and how election officials nationwide are battling voter mistrust that is the product of Russian attempts to meddle in the 2016 election. This is an annotated and condensed version of the central part of the conversation:

If you could speak to the average voter in Pennsylvania and nationwide, what is your message to them? Should they be afraid?

Of course there are concerns about misinformation and disinformation that are contributing to people's worries, she said. But in Pennsylvania the state has been on a constant path of improving voting systems and security. And so:

"What that means is that I have tremendous confidence in the security and resiliency of Pennsylvania elections. We're really on a mission to make sure that every voter can walk into the poll booth; or three weeks before election day walk into their county election office; or vote by mail; and know their vote will be counted accurately and securely and arguably more securely than at any point in time before now. One of the things Russians and other bad actors have learned is how vulnerable we are to misinformation and disinformation. And we can't let that win."

How do you overcome fear?

"I think the answer is a mix of actions and communication." She said the actions in Pennsylvania have included the rollout of a separate election web page for all 67 counties. In addition, the state adopted its own new, more rigorous security and certification standards for election equipment instead of waiting for the Election Assistance Commission to finish its upgrade of national standards. In addition, she has been traveling the state, meeting with local officials and attending community events.

What were the keys to passing the comprehensive election reform legislation?

"What was key was that the bill genuinely included things both sides wanted. It was kind of what used to happen all the time." She said it reminded her of settlement negotiations as a lawyer. "You are never going to have a settlement where everybody's happy."

"It truly was historic. It's historic in the wins for Pennsylvania voters. But it was historic in the process; in that process of negotiation and give-and-take genuinely working. It doesn't happen enough anymore."

What are the lessons that other states and local governments learn from the experience in Pennsylvania?

"There's no magic. There's no rocket science. The willingness to continue to engage in conversations even after the first attempt failed. Sometimes it's too easy after a first round fails to just give up."

Read More

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
Once Again, Politicians Are Choosing Their Voters. It’s Time for Voters To Choose Back.
A pile of political buttons sitting on top of a table

Once Again, Politicians Are Choosing Their Voters. It’s Time for Voters To Choose Back.

Once again, politicians are trying to choose their voters to guarantee their own victories before the first ballot is cast.

In the latest round of redistricting wars, Texas Republicans are attempting a rare mid-decade redistricting to boost their advantage ahead of the 2026 midterms, and Democratic governors in California and New York are signaling they’re ready to “fight fire with fire” with their own partisan gerrymanders.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stolen Land, Stolen Votes: Native Americans Defending the VRA Protects Us All – and We Should Support Them

Wilson Deschine sits at the "be my voice" voter registration stand at the Navajo Nation annual rodeo, in Window Rock.

Getty Images, David Howells

Stolen Land, Stolen Votes: Native Americans Defending the VRA Protects Us All – and We Should Support Them

On July 24, the Supreme Court temporarily blocked a Circuit Court order in a far-reaching case that could affect the voting rights of all Americans. Native American tribes and individuals filed the case as part of their centuries-old fight for rights in their own land.

The underlying subject of the case confronts racial gerrymandering against America’s first inhabitants, where North Dakota’s 2021 redistricting reduced Native Americans’ chances of electing up to three state representatives to just one. The specific issue that the Supreme Court may consider, if it accepts hearing the case, is whether individuals and associations can seek justice under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). That is because the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, contradicting other courts, said that individuals do not have standing to bring Section 2 cases.

Keep ReadingShow less