Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Nevada redistricting effort gets more time, but not electronic signatures

Nevada's congressional districts
mapchart.net

Redistricting reformers in Nevada have another shot at getting their initiative on the November ballot after a federal judge allowed for more time to collect signatures.

Judge Miranda Du of Reno has given Fair Maps Nevada six extra weeks to circulate petitions but turned down the group's request to be allowed to collect electronic signatures. Adhering to this month's deadline in light of the coronavirus pandemic would be unconstitutional, she wrote Friday, but relaxing the state's requirement for handwritten signatures could incubate fraud.


Approval of the ballot measure would create a nonpartisan commission to replace the Legislature in drawing both the congressional and state legislative maps for the state, which is now the case in eight other states.

The November election is the last shot at redistricting reform for a decade, because new maps are drawn nationwide once the census provides detailed population counts.

Originally, Fair Maps Nevada had until June 24 to collect at least 98,000 signatures — and said it had gathered only 10,000 when Democratic Gov. Steve Sisolak imposed a statewide stay-at-home order in April. He has since reopened most businesses but continues to encourage people to remain out of public places if possible.

Since the group could not collect signatures due to Covid-19, the judge wrote, "it is both unreasonable and unfair not to extend a statutory deadline for a corresponding period of time."

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

The new deadline is Aug. 5, or 90 days before Election Day. Du said the group and state officials could agree on a different date, but she recommended "an extension corresponding to the precise length of time the stay-at-home order was in effect."

Allowing e-signatures would make the citizen's democracy effort more susceptible to fraud and require the court "to get impermissibly in the weeds of designing election procedures," Du wrote, noting the Supreme Court precedent that strongly discourages lower federal courts from altering election rules.

A similar referendum is already on the ballot in Virginia and proponents for such a measure in Arkansas are also asking the courts for more time to get signatures. Missourians, on the other hand, will vote in November on whether to reverse a redistricting reform initiative approved two years ago.

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