Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Online voting for all in a Seattle area election, security concerns be damned

Mobile voting

Voters in Washington state's largest county have until Feb. 11 to use their phones or laptops to cast ballots for the local conservation board.

SvetaZi/Getty Images

In a development sure to worry election security experts, the conservation district for the Seattle area is conducting this year's election on the internet.

It is the ninth election in the fifth state to use mobile voting, but the first time that method has been for everyone who casts a ballot, Tusk Philanthropies said Wednesday in announcing an agreement with officials in Washington's King County to help promote the voting. Previous uses of mobile systems have been confined to overseas, military or disabled people in the electorate.

Since Russians attempted to hack into voting systems during the 2016 presidential election, security experts have uniformly criticized any system with an online component. The most secure method for voting, they agree, involves paper ballots that no one but the voter can mark, and can then be readily recounted or used in an audit to assure the accuracy of returns.


Nonetheless, businessman Bradley Tusk — who created his philanthropy to promote, among other causes, the use of mobile voting — hailed the use of smartphones and laptops by as many as 1.2 million voters "the biggest innovation in democracy in years."

The election is for supervisors of the King Conservation District, a non-regulatory agency that promotes responsible uses of the natural resources in the state's biggest county. The voting began Wednesday and continues through Feb. 11.

Voters will log into a portal using their name and date of birth to get access to the ballot. They will then electronically return their ballot, although they will have an option to print it out and drop it off or mail it in.

Proponents say that election officials are able to print out the ballots and use them to audit the election but security experts say that the fact that the ballots are filled out and sent using devices connected to the Internet undermines the value of the auditing process.

Bryan Finney, of Democracy Live, the company providing the electronic platform for the King County vote, said this type of voting provides opportunities for people with disabilities and those living in remote areas. It also has been used for overseas military voting.

Julie Wise, King County's director of elections, said the mobile balloting will make it "easier than ever for voters to access their Conservation District ballot and cast their vote." Her statement added: "We are always looking for ways to improve access and engage our voters."

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