Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The For the People Act is not dead  yet

Opinion

Sen. Chuck Schumer and Sen. Mitch McConnell

Pool/Getty Images

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (left) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell are continuing to maneuver on opposites sides of the For the People Act.
Effingham is director of federal reform for RepresentUs, a right-left anti-corruption group.

Pundits and journalists have expressed doubts about the future of the For the People Act since it was introduced, and continue to label it "dead" in article after article. The reality is that the landmark voting rights bill has never been closer to getting passed — but the window to do so is quickly closing.

Of course, we're well aware of the main hurdles in the way. It's true that not a single Republican senator supports the bill. And yes, because of that, we face the obstacle of the filibuster. But Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is laying the groundwork to bring along hesitant colleagues and break the logjam.

You see, a complicated game of chess is playing out in the Senate. In the wee hours of the night last week, Schumer introduced three pieces of legislation: the For the People Act, as well as a stand-alone anti- gerrymandering bill and a stand-alone dark money"disclosure" bill. Republican Ted Cruz immediately filibustered the bills. At 4:30 a.m., just before adjourning for August recess, Schumer declared, "Republicans have formed a total wall of opposition against progress on voting rights. That's what we have come to: total Republican intransigence."

Let's step back for a second. In the last two months, Republican senators on four occasions have blocked debate from starting on legislation to set common-sense baseline voting standards, end gerrymandering and get big money out of politics. These are issues that all have overwhelming bipartisan support in the country — particularly gerrymandering, which 89 percent of voters oppose.

Prior to the latest filibuster of the bills, Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin tried to win Republican support for a compromise bill that set a national voter ID standard. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell called that good-faith negotiation attempt "comic relief."

But Schumer is moving the pieces into place to pass the For the People Act, despite Republican opposition. He is forcing his Democratic colleagues to realize an unfortunate truth: Republicans in the Senate have shown us time and time again that there is no proposal — no matter how popular or how historically bipartisan — that they're willing to support.

By bringing voting rights to the floor again, Schumer sent a message before leaving town. If passing popular standalone pieces of legislation like the Redistricting Reform Act won't get 10 Republicans, if passing reasonable voting protections that includes a voter ID standard won't get 10 Republicans, Democrats in the Senate must come to terms with the reality that there is nothing of value in the democracy space that will get Republican support. So they must take the only alternative route forward: filibuster reform.

Manchin and others continue to voice concerns about ending the filibuster, but they must now see they have no other options. Democracy depends on Democratic senators figuring out how to end gridlock on voting rights and enact filibuster reform.

There is no time to waste. The Census Bureau delivered population data to states last week, kicking off the redistricting process that could see unprecedented gerrymandering aided by powerful supercomputers and the blessing of the Supreme Court. RepresentUs' Gerrymandering Threat Index shows that 35 states are at "extreme" or "high" risk of partisan gerrymandering. That's why we partnered with the Princeton Gerrymandering Project on a Redistricting Report Card to detect gerrymandering and grade each state's proposed maps. If the Senate doesn't pass federal anti-gerrymandering reform immediately when it reconvenes, we could be stuck with bad voting maps for the next decade.

With the Senate in recess, now is the time to call and write your senators and urge them to support the For the People Act. Because Schumer said that when the Senate comes back next month, the bill will be first on the agenda. Make no mistake: Democratic senators know how to move this bill forward reforming the filibuster. They know they have no other choice.

Read More

“It’s Probably as Bad as It Can Get”:
A Conversation with Lilliana Mason

Liliana Mason

“It’s Probably as Bad as It Can Get”: A Conversation with Lilliana Mason

In the aftermath of the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, the threat of political violence has become a topic of urgent concern in the United States. While public support for political violence remains low—according to Sean Westwood of the Polarization Research Lab, fewer than 2 percent of Americans believe that political murder is acceptable—even isolated incidence of political violence can have a corrosive effect.

According to political scientist Lilliana Mason, political violence amounts to a rejection of democracy. “If a person has used violence to achieve a political goal, then they’ve given up on the democratic process,” says Mason, “Instead, they’re trying to use force to affect government.”

Keep ReadingShow less
We Need To Rethink the Way We Prevent Sexual Violence Against Children

We Need To Rethink the Way We Prevent Sexual Violence Against Children

November 20 marks World Children’s Day, marking the adoption of the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child. While great strides have been made in many areas, we are failing one of the declaration’s key provisions: to “protect the child from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse.”

Sexual violence against children is a public health crisis that keeps escalating, thanks in no small part to the internet, with hundreds of millions of children falling victim to online sexual violence annually. Addressing sexual violence against children only once it materializes is not enough, nor does it respect the rights of the child to be protected from violence. We need to reframe the way we think about child protection and start preventing sexual violence against children holistically.

Keep ReadingShow less
People waving US flags

A deep look at what “American values” truly mean, contrasting liberal, conservative, and MAGA interpretations through the lens of the Declaration and Constitution.

LeoPatrizi/Getty Images

What Are American Values?

There are fundamental differences between liberals and conservatives—and certainly MAGA adherents—on what are “American values.”

But for both liberal and conservative pundits, the term connotes something larger than us, grounding, permanent—of lasting meaning. Because the values of people change as the times change, as the culture changes, and as the political temperament changes. The results of current polls are the values of the moment, not "American values."

Keep ReadingShow less
Voting Rights Are Back on Trial...Again

Vote here sign

Caitlin Wilson/AFP via Getty Images

Voting Rights Are Back on Trial...Again

Last month, one of the most consequential cases before the Supreme Court began. Six white Justices, two Black and one Latina took the bench for arguments in Louisiana v. Callais. Addressing a core principle of the Voting Rights Act of 1965: representation. The Court is asked to consider if prohibiting the creation of voting districts that intentionally dilute Black and Brown voting power in turn violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th and 15th Amendments.

For some, it may be difficult to believe that we’re revisiting this question in 2025. But in truth, the path to voting has been complex since the founding of this country; especially when you template race over the ballot box. America has grappled with the voting question since the end of the Civil War. Through amendments, Congress dropped the term “property” when describing millions of Black Americans now freed from their plantation; then later clarified that we were not only human beings but also Americans before realizing the right to vote could not be assumed in this country. Still, nearly a century would pass before President Lyndon B Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 ensuring voting was accessible, free and fair.

Keep ReadingShow less