Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Floridians voted to enfranchise felons, but GOP plans new restrictions

Florida legislators are moving to minimize the impact of last fall's decision by the voters to restore voting rights to felons in the nation's third largest state.

The Republicans who dominate the state House began advancing legislation Tuesday that would require felons to pay all outstanding court fees and fines before they may go to the polls.

Critics say the move could block more than 80 percent of the 1.4 million Floridians who were supposed to be eligible to register starting this year.


Reporting by WLRN in Miami found that, in the last five years, over $1 billion in felony fines were issued but only 19 percent were paid, while the state association for court clerks deemed 83 percent of those fines to have "minimal collections expectations."

Democratic Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez of New York took to Twitter to label the legislation "a poll tax by any other name." Its Republican authors disputed that characterization and said their effort was to live – albeit strictly – with the terms the voters set.

But the constitutional amendment, approved in November by 65 percent of voters, makes no mention of restitutions. It says voting rights are to be restored after former felons "complete all terms of their sentence including parole or probation." Excepted are those convicted of "murder or sexual offenses."

The bill would classify every felony with any kind of sexual component as a disqualifying "sexual offense," including operating an adult entertainment store too close to a school.

It was approved by committee Tuesday and now goes to the full House, where the GOP holds a 71-46 edge. Republicans hold a solid majority in the state Senate as well, and Gov. Ron DeSantis has signaled his support for the legislation.

"What the barriers proposed in this bill do is nearly guarantee that people will miss election after election ... because they cannot afford to pay financial obligations," Julie Ebenstein, a voting rights attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union, told NBC News. "It's an affront to the Florida voters."


Read More

Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses
black video camera
Photo by Matt C on Unsplash

Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses

This week, I joined a coalition of journalists in Washington, D.C., to speak directly with lawmakers about a crisis unfolding in plain sight: the rapid disappearance of local, community‑rooted journalism. The advocacy day, organized by the Hispanic Technology & Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP), brought together reporters and media leaders who understand that the future of local news is inseparable from the future of American democracy.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Keep ReadingShow less
People wearing vests with "ICE" and "Police" on the back.

The latest shutdown deal kept government open while exposing Congress’s reliance on procedural oversight rather than structural limits on ICE.

Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

A Shutdown Averted, and a Narrow Window Into Congress’s ICE Dilemma

Congress’s latest shutdown scare ended the way these episodes usually do: with a stopgap deal, a sigh of relief, and little sense that the underlying conflict had been resolved. But buried inside the agreement was a revealing maneuver. While most of the federal government received longer-term funding, the Department of Homeland Security, and especially Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), was given only a short-term extension. That asymmetry was deliberate. It preserved leverage over one of the most controversial federal agencies without triggering a prolonged shutdown, while also exposing the narrow terrain on which Congress is still willing to confront executive power. As with so many recent budget deals, the decision emerged less from open debate than from late-stage negotiations compressed into the final hours before the deadline.

How the Deal Was Framed

Democrats used the funding deadline to force a conversation about ICE’s enforcement practices, but they were careful about how that conversation was structured. Rather than reopening the far more combustible debate over immigration levels, deportation priorities, or statutory authority, they framed the dispute as one about law-enforcement standards, specifically transparency, accountability, and oversight.

Keep ReadingShow less
ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You
A pole with a sign that says polling station
Photo by Phil Hearing on Unsplash

ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You

The brutality of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the related cohort of federal officers in Minneapolis spurred more than 30,000 stalwart Minnesotans to step forward in January and be trained as monitors. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s demands to Minnesota’s Governor demonstrate that the ICE surge is linked to elections, and other ICE-related threats, including Steve Bannon calling for ICE agents deployment to polling stations, make clear that elections should be on the monitoring agenda in Minnesota and across the nation.

A recent exhortation by the New York Times Editorial Board underscores the need for citizen action to defend elections and outlines some steps. Additional avenues are also available. My three decades of experience with international and citizen election observation in numerous countries demonstrates that monitoring safeguards trustworthy elections and promotes public confidence in them - both of which are needed here and now in the US.

Keep ReadingShow less