Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Disabled were a key bloc in midterm turnout surge

Disability rights advocates

Disability rights advocates listen during a 2012 hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C.

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Voting by people with disabilities surged in the 2018 midterm election and this bloc of voters is expected to be more formidable than ever in the 2020 presidential contest, a new report says.

Lisa Schur and Douglas Kruse, professors in the School of Management and Labor Relations at Rutgers University, based their study on an analysis of data from last November's monthly survey by the Census Bureau. It revealed:

  • Turnout among people with disabilities was 49.3 percent, an 8.5 percentage point increase from the previous midterm, in 2014.
  • An estimated 14.3 million people with disabilities voted and another 10.2 million voters live with someone with a disability.
  • The bloc of voters with a disability was larger than the 11.7 million Latinos who went to the polls and closer to the 15.2 million African Americans who cast ballots.

"Going into the 2020 elections, these results show that the disability community is likely to be very politically engaged," said Kruse.

Still, the share of disabled people who voted in 2018 was 4 points below the overall percentage of voting-age people who turned out. And the nationwide turnout surge — from a post-World War II low in 2014 to a best-in-a-century mark in 2018 — easily eclipsed the boost in participation by the disabled.

Those with disabilities who were not registered to vote in 2018 most often cited a lack of interest in politics (35.5 percent) and the limitations created by their own disabilities (25.7 percent). Those disabled citizens who were registered and still did not vote most often cited their disability (41 percent) and transportation problems (12.1 percent).

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