Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

A Wisconsin do-over? Mail delaying ballots beyond Ohio's primary day

USPS worker

Due to Postal Service delays, some Ohio voters may not receive their absentee ballots in time for the primary election.

Scott Olson/Getty Images

Some Ohio voters will not receive ballots in time for Tuesday's delayed primary, which is supposed to be happening almost entirely by mail.

The Postal Service is mainly to blame, Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose said Thursday, although the problem has been compounded by the overwhelming flood of absentee ballot requests that county election boards have struggled to fulfill in time.

The primary will be the first in the country since Wisconsin's election April 7, and what happens in the next few days will determine if Ohio follows in those disastrous footsteps. Although more than 70 percent of the Wisconsin vote came in by mail, thousands risked coronavirus exposure to vote in person — many because, they said, their requested absentee ballots didn't get to them in time.


Ohio's original March 17 primary was scrapped the night before when the state declared a public health emergency. When the GOP-controlled Legislature rescheduled the election it said only the homeless and people with disabilities could vote in person.

By this week, 1.7 million Ohioans had requested a ballot. Four years ago, only 185,000 voted by mail in the primary and 1.2 million did so in the general election, or about one in five voters. (In normal circumstances, Ohioans applying to vote absentee do not need to provide an excuse.)

Saturday is the last day for Ohioans to request an absentee ballot for the primary, creating a nearly impossibly tight turnaround for election officials and postal workers.

First-class mail, which usually arrives in one to three days, is now taking a week or longer in Ohio, LaRose said in a letter to the state's members of Congress.

"As we approach the April 28 deadline to complete the election, we are faced with an

obstacle that is outside of our control," he wrote. "As you can imagine, these delays mean it is very possible that many Ohioans who have requested a ballot may not receive it in time."

Voters without an absentee ballot in hand by Monday may cast a provisional vote the next day at their county board of elections office. A week ago, LaRose instructed county officials to provide this option. But it's not clear how that will work with social distancing requirements in place and elections staff expecting relatively small numbers of voters.

Completed mail ballots must be postmarked by Monday night and arrive within 10 days in order to be counted, or they may be delivered Tuesday to the county offices.

For a glimpse of what could lie ahead, skeptics of Ohio's process are looking to Wisconsin.

At least 183,000 ballots, or 14 percent of all those mailed to voters, had not been returned or counted a week after the election. In addition, more than 11,000 requested mail ballots were never put in the mail, the state's elections board says.

In his letter, LaRose asked for congressional intervention to direct additional staff to Ohio USPS offices, pushed for the postal service processing facilities to stay open Sunday and asked for a thorough search of mail facilities to find unprocessed mail.

Voting rights advocates warned the Legislature that its plan would not provide enough time for the absentee voting process to be carried out completely, but their subsequent lawsuits were rejected. LaRose and GOP Gov. Mike Dewine advocated for extending the time for voting to June 2.

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