Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Citing virus, senior senator proposes $500 million for voting at home

Sen. Ron Wyden

Fearing the coronavirus may drive down turnout, Sen. Ron Wyden proposed giving states money to cover the costs of voting by mail.

Samuel Corum/Getty Images

With the coronavirus now officially labeled a pandemic by the World Health Organization, concerns about its impact on the election keep growing.

Candidates are canceling rallies. Sunday's Democratic presidential debate in Phoenix won't have a live audience. And election officials are worried the disease's unpredictable spread will dampen turnout in the remaining primaries and in November.

An influential senior senator is proposing a remedy for that last concern: Make it easy for voters to cast their ballots from home.


Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon plans to introduce legislation Wednesday that would establish a $500 million federal fund for creating vote-by-mail systems in times of national crisis. The bill would also give all Americans the right to vote from home this year if more than a dozen states declared a coronavirus emergency.

At least for now, the bill will be a decided long shot in the gridlocked Senate, where the Republican majority has opposed all proposals for giving Washington more influence over how states and counties conduct elections.

Voting by mail has become increasingly popular. In the 2018 midterm, more than 31 million ballots were cast this way, a quarter of the total. All states offer voters with excuses related to travel, age or disability the option to mail in their votes. But over the past two decades, many states have expanded use of the practice.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Twenty years ago, Wyden's home state of Oregon became the first to adopt vote-by-mail for all elections. Colorado, Utah, Washington and (for the first time this year) Hawaii are also entirely vote-by-mail states; voters automatically receive a ballot that they can return by mail, in a secure dropbox or at a polling station. Sixteen other states have provisions that allow certain elections to use mail-in voting.

Mailing in ballots would not only protect voters from public health crises, but would also prevent poll workers — who tend to be elderly and therefore more at risk — from getting sick.

Long lines, which thousands have faced already in recent primaries, would also no longer be a problem with widely implemented vote-at-home measures.

That's what voting by mail is all about, according to Amber McReynolds of the National Vote at Home Institute, which advocates for widespread use of vote-by-mail systems. "It's delivering democracy through an existing infrastructure: the U.S. Postal Service," she said Wednesday.

An added bonus is that most Americans consider the Postal Service to be the most trustworthy brand in the country, according to a January survey by Morning Consult.

McReynolds said Wyden's plan captures many of the best practices her organization has recommended, including paying for postage and secure drop boxes.

No such measure has been introduced in the Democratic House, where its prospects would be better. But if the idea gains unexpected traction because of COVID-19, the bill could be enacted in time for November.

"I hope this bill garners bipartisan support because it's something that serves the entire electorate," McReynolds said. "And hopefully it will relieve some of the burden placed on people by the coronavirus."

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