Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories
Made with Flourish

Stimulus standoff stalls funding to make voting easier

Made with Flourish
Made with Flourish

How much to spend making elections safe this year, and whether to set new federal requirements for easing the voting process, were among many unresolved questions Monday as congressional leaders and the Trump administration struggled to agree on a nearly $2 trillion plan to rescue the economy from the coronavirus crisis.

The package Senate Republicans tried unsuccessfully to advance over the weekend included just $140 million to help states and local election officials "prepare for and respond to" the virus — but with no ground rules for spending the grants. Senate Democrats are holding out for an order of magnitude more, about $1.5 billion, while momentum was building in the Democratic-majority House for spending $4 billion rushing a universal vote-by-mail system into place in the next seven months.

The standoff, and the amounts of money involved, are second-tier issues in the context of the most significant federal economic bailout bill in modern times. But for advocates of boosting civic engagement and easing the bitter battles over voting rights, negotiations on the package offer a rare and enormously important opportunity to achieve goals set long before the pandemic.


Democrats and good governance groups hope to capitalize on the moment to secure a significant expansion of voting from home in November. They say that, by allowing tens of millions more to make their presidential choice remotely in November, they will do more than reassure the public that conducting the 2020 election can be done safely and securely: Once voting by mail becomes an option for most Americans — only a quarter of votes were cast that way in 2016 — it will quickly become the national norm.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

But unless Congress insists on the switch, they say, turnout will plummet in many parts of the country — sowing doubt about whether the national will is reflected in the result and dwarfing anxieties about the effects of foreign hacking and disinformation.

Those arguments have, so far, been met with almost unanimous resistance from Republicans, led by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who are willing to give states and localities federal aid for modernizing elections but oppose almost any new federal mandates on what those improvements should be.

It is also clear that GOP candidates generally believe they do best in low-turnout elections, while Democrats are confident they do best when more people are able to vote.

"I think we're going to end up being OK on the money, but we're going to have to keep fighting him on the details," Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, the former presidential candidate now leading the vote-by-mail effort for the Senate Democrats, said of McConnell on Monday. (She spoke to reporters after announcing her husband, John, had been hospitalized because of limited breathing capacity after testing positive for Covid-19.)

"We have a new case to make to Republicans now," said her partner in that effort, Ron Wyden of Oregon, who's been pushing to expand absentee voting since he won the nation's first all-mail Senate election 24 years ago. "In a worst case scenario, it's going to be a choice between voting by mail or not voting at all. That's not even a close call."

While the massive package was still stalled in the Senate for lack of a bipartisan breakthrough, the Democrats in charge of the House were pressing ahead in crafting a response to whatever senators end up advancing. To that end, 55 of them over the weekend signed on to making an immediate vote-at-home mandate part of the package.

"We may be forced to decide that an all vote by mail election is our only choice if we hope to keep people safe and protect the continuity of our democratic elections," one of them, New Jersey's Tom Malinoswski, tweeted. "The most important thing we can do is enable states to prepare ahead of time."

The cost for all states to print, mail and count postage-paid and barcoded ballots for the entire country in November, and pay the people to run the effort, would fall between $982 million and $1.4 billion, according to a Brennan Center for Justice analysis released last week. The progressive think tank said another $600 million would be needed to expand in-person early voting and online registration efforts to minimize in-person contact with the voting system.

The group has organized a bipartisan group of 19 state and local election officials, many from reliably red states, to lobby Congress for a generous grant package but without getting behind any of the nationwide mandates.

One of their fears, they signaled, is that without ample additional aid for people and equipment, a surge in absentee voting even without a mandate could overwhelm their systems in November and make impossible a vote count that's both reliable and speedy.

Every state offers some sort of absentee or vote-by mail option, but the rules vary greatly — from an excuse required on absentee ballot applications that must be resubmitted before every election in nine states, to the five states where mail-in ballots are delivered to every voter before every contest — which is what the Klobuchar-Wyden bill envisions. The senators say that, without a federal mandate, 16 states would have to change their laws to make this a reality by November.

Packing even more into the Wyden-Klobuchar bill

Among other provisions, their legislation would:

    • Require states to permit at least 20 days of early in-person voting and no-excuse absentee voting-by-mail and to start counting those ballots two weeks before Election Day.
    • Make states provide self-sealing envelopes with prepaid postage to go with all absentee ballots, applications for those ballots and registration applications.
    • Make downloadable and printable absentee ballots available to anyone who did not receive one by mail.
    • Bar states from setting registration deadlines more than three weeks ahead of Election Day.
    • Mandate that absentee ballots be valid if postmarked before polls close on Election Day and received within 10 days.
    • Require states to track (and allow voters to track) their mail ballots by putting barcodes on the envelopes.
    • Compel states to create procedures for voters to appeal when their ballot signatures don't match signatures on file.
    • Subsidize the cost of hiring and training a new generation of poll workers, now that three of every five in the country are older than 60.
    Made with Flourish

    Read More

    "Voter Here" sign outside of a polling location.

    "Voter Here" sign outside of a polling location.

    Getty Images, Grace Cary

    Stopping the Descent Toward Banana Republic Elections

    President Trump’s election-related executive order begins by pointing out practices in Canada, Sweden, Brazil, and elsewhere that outperform the U.S. But it is Trump’s order itself that really demonstrates how far we’ve fallen behind. In none of the countries mentioned, or any other major democracy in the world, would the head of government change election rules by decree, as Trump has tried to do.

    Trump is the leader of a political party that will fight for control of Congress in 2026, an election sure to be close, and important to his presidency. The leader of one side in such a competition has no business unilaterally changing its rules—that’s why executive decrees changing elections only happen in tinpot dictatorships, not democracies.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    "Vote" pin.
    Getty Images, William Whitehurst

    Most Americans’ Votes Don’t Matter in Deciding Elections

    New research from the Unite America Institute confirms a stark reality: Most ballots cast in American elections don’t matter in deciding the outcome. In 2024, just 14% of eligible voters cast a meaningful vote that actually influenced the outcome of a U.S. House race. For state house races, on average across all 50 states, just 13% cast meaningful votes.

    “Too many Americans have no real say in their democracy,” said Unite America Executive Director Nick Troiano. “Every voter deserves a ballot that not only counts, but that truly matters. We should demand better than ‘elections in name only.’”

    Keep ReadingShow less
    Why America’s Elections Will Never Be the Same After Trump
    text
    Photo by Dan Dennis on Unsplash

    Why America’s Elections Will Never Be the Same After Trump

    Donald Trump wasted no time when he returned to the White House. Within hours, he signed over 200 executive orders, rapidly dismantling years of policy and consolidating control with the stroke of a pen. But the frenzy of reversals was only the surface. Beneath it lies a deeper, more troubling transformation: presidential elections have become all-or-nothing battles, where the victor rewrites the rules of government and the loser’s agenda is annihilated.

    And it’s not just the orders. Trump’s second term has unleashed sweeping deportations, the purging of federal agencies, and a direct assault on the professional civil service. With the revival of Schedule F, regulatory rollbacks, and the targeting of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs, the federal bureaucracy is being rigged to serve partisan ideology. Backing him is a GOP-led Congress, too cowardly—or too complicit—to assert its constitutional authority.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    One Lesson from the Elections: Looking At Universal Voting

    A roll of "voted" stickers.

    Pexels, Element5 Digital

    One Lesson from the Elections: Looking At Universal Voting

    The analysis and parsing of learned lessons from the 2024 elections will continue for a long time. What did the campaigns do right and wrong? What policies will emerge from the new arrangements of power? What do the parties need to do for the future?

    An equally important question is what lessons are there for our democratic structures and processes. One positive lesson is that voting itself was almost universally smooth and effective; we should applaud the election officials who made that happen. But, many elements of the 2024 elections are deeply challenging, from the increasingly outsized role of billionaires in the process to the onslaught of misinformation and disinformation.

    Keep ReadingShow less