Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Mueller stresses gravity of Russian meddling, but election security secondary at hearings

Mueller stresses gravity of Russian meddling, but election security secondary at hearings

Robert Mueller testifies before the House Intelligence Committee on Wednesday afternoon.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

The extensive Russian interference in the 2016 election still "deserves the attention of every American," Robert Mueller reiterated Wednesday, but the gaps in election security permitting a foreign adversary to influence the presidential outcome received minimal attention during the former special counsel's day testifying to Congress.

While his testimony was dominated by terse one-word answers or halting sentence fragments affirming the contents of his report, Mueller was crystal clear and emphatically in his own voice on a singular point.

In fact, it was the one thing the former FBI director said, almost word for word, in his opening statements to both the House Judiciary and House Intelligence committees.

"Over the course of my career, I have seen a number of challenges to our democracy. The Russian government's effort to interfere in our election is among the most serious," he told Judiciary at breakfast time. "This deserves the attention of every American."


Appearing after lunch before the Intelligence panel, which has become among the most polarized on Capitol Hill during its own two-year probe of Russian meddling, Mueller added: "And I am sure that this committee agrees."

The nationally televised morning session spent almost no time on the parts of Mueller's April report detailing the porousness of the American election system. Instead, the focus was on whether President Trump obstructed the special counsel's inquiry, during which Democrats succeeded in getting Mueller to bluntly say that he had not cleared the president of obstruction of justice, or "totally exonerated" him, as Trump describes it.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Republicans at both hearings focused on casting doubt on the credibility of the Mueller investigation.

The Democratic lawmakers at the afternoon session did spend some time trying to get Mueller to expand on his report's description of a "sweeping and sophisticated" campaign by Russia to tilt the election Trump's way — highlighted by an expansive social media disinformation and propaganda campaign, the theft and leaking of thousands of Democratic National Committee emails, and finally extensive efforts to hack into the aging voting systems used in bellwether counties and tossup states.

The report provides an extensive catalogue of the vulnerabilities in the U.S. election system that Russia sought to exploit. It infiltrated the emails and computer networks of unwitting election administrators and the companies that supply voting machines and registration software across the country.

As he did in almost all aspects of his testimony, Mueller declined entreaties to expand on his report's findings — or to even read from its 448 pages. While he testified several times that Trump was supposed to be the beneficiary of Russia's efforts, the special counsel curtly said he was "not going to speculate" when asked what, if any, effect all the meddling had on his election victory.

While Congress has been preoccupied by the propriety and political consequences of beginning impeachment proceedings against Trump, which would be based at least in part on the obstruction evidence in Mueller's report, there's essentially no doubt that any charges brought by the Democratic House would produce an acquittal in the Republican Senate.

And for the moment, the same sort of gridlock exists when it comes to the tangible things Congress could do to prevent foreign interference in the 2020 campaign and beyond.

Publicly disclosing the buyers of online political ads, mandating a paper record for each vote, and explicitly banning foreign assistance to presidential and congressional candidates are all provisions in HR 1, the political process overhaul passed by the Democratic House and sentenced to death in the GOP Senate.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has promised to bury not only that bill but virtually all other measures aimed at shoring up election security, labeling them either unnecessary or infringing on states' rights to run their own elections. The measure that stands the best chance, especially in light of the bipartisan deal to boost spending Congress is on course to clear this week, would deliver several hundred million dollars to the states for buying modernized voting equipment in time for November 2020.

Read More

MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

A check mark and hands.

Photo by Allison Saeng on Unsplash. Unsplash+ License obtained by the author.

MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

Originally published by Independent Voter News.

Today, I am proud to share an exciting milestone in my journey as an advocate for democracy and electoral reform.

Keep ReadingShow less
Half-Baked Alaska

A photo of multiple checked boxes.

Getty Images / Thanakorn Lappattaranan

Half-Baked Alaska

This past year’s elections saw a number of state ballot initiatives of great national interest, which proposed the adoption of two “unusual” election systems for state and federal offices. Pairing open nonpartisan primaries with a general election using ranked choice voting, these reforms were rejected by the citizens of Colorado, Idaho, and Nevada. The citizens of Alaska, however, who were the first to adopt this dual system in 2020, narrowly confirmed their choice after an attempt to repeal it in November.

Ranked choice voting, used in Alaska’s general elections, allows voters to rank their candidate choices on their ballot and then has multiple rounds of voting until one candidate emerges with a majority of the final vote and is declared the winner. This more representative result is guaranteed because in each round the weakest candidate is dropped, and the votes of that candidate’s supporters automatically transfer to their next highest choice. Alaska thereby became the second state after Maine to use ranked choice voting for its state and federal elections, and both have had great success in their use.

Keep ReadingShow less
Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

The United States Supreme Court.

Getty Images / Rudy Sulgan

Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

Fourteen years ago, after the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the popular blanket primary system, Californians voted to replace the deeply unpopular closed primary that replaced it with a top-two system. Since then, Democratic Party insiders, Republican Party insiders, minor political parties, and many national reform and good government groups, have tried (and failed) to deep-six the system because the public overwhelmingly supports it (over 60% every year it’s polled).

Now, three minor political parties, who opposed the reform from the start and have unsuccessfully sued previously, are once again trying to overturn it. The Peace and Freedom Party, the Green Party, and the Libertarian Party have teamed up to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Their brief repeats the same argument that the courts have previously rejected—that the top-two system discriminates against parties and deprives voters of choice by not guaranteeing every party a place on the November ballot.

Keep ReadingShow less
Ranked Choice Voting May Be a Stepping Stone to Proportional Representation

Someone filling out a ballot.

Getty Images / Hill Street Studios

Ranked Choice Voting May Be a Stepping Stone to Proportional Representation

In the 2024 U.S. election, several states did not pass ballot initiatives to implement Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) despite strong majority support from voters under 65. Still, RCV was defended in Alaska, passed by a landslide in Washington, D.C., and has earned majority support in 31 straight pro-RCV city ballot measures. Still, some critics of RCV argue that it does not enhance and promote democratic principles as much as forms of proportional representation (PR), as commonly used throughout Europe and Latin America.

However, in the U.S. many people have not heard of PR. The question under consideration is whether implementing RCV serves as a stepping stone to PR by building public understanding and support for reforms that move away from winner-take-all systems. Utilizing a nationally representative sample of respondents (N=1000) on the 2022 Cooperative Election Survey (CES), results show that individuals who favor RCV often also know about and back PR. When comparing other types of electoral reforms, RCV uniquely transfers into support for PR, in ways that support for nonpartisan redistricting and the national popular vote do not. These findings can inspire efforts that demonstrate how RCV may facilitate the adoption of PR in the U.S.

Keep ReadingShow less