Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Democratic state officials call on Biden to boost election funding

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson was on of 14 signatories on the letter.

Kent Nishimura/Los Angeles Times via Getty Image

Editor's note: This story has been updated to make clear that proposed election spending has not been included in enacted spending bills. It was included in proposed legislation that has not passed.

The top election officials in 14 states on Monday asked the Biden administration to include billions of dollars for election infrastructure in the next budget proposal, citing the financial strain of Covid-19, cybersecurity and a shift to voting by mail.

The request — for $5 billion in fiscal 2023 and a total of $20 billion over 10 years — would go toward equipment, facilities, training and security, according to a letter signed by 14 state officials.

All signatories are Democrats, except Veronica Degraffenried, the nonpartisan acting secretary of state in Pennsylvania. She has been nominated for the post by Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf.


“As the lead election officials of our respective states, we are entrusted with conducting, funding, and supporting local, state, and federal elections in jurisdictions across the country,” the letter states. “Election security and integrity are a vital cornerstone of our democracy. But because of years of underinvestment by the federal government, too many voters and election workers contend with elections infrastructure that has reached the end of its shelf life.”

While much of the letter focuses on the need to update systems and equipment, it also mentions ongoing threats against election personne l. It argues that “we’re living in a climate where election workers are routinely being besieged, attacked, and threatened,” and points to a Homeland Security Department notice warning of increased calls for election-related violence.

This request follows a similar pitch made to congressional leaders in September. But the extra funding has not been included in any enacted spending bills, so the state officials have turned to the White House.

“Secretaries of state from every part of the country are feeling a real sense of urgency around meeting the deep and growing election infrastructure needs at the local and state levels,” said Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson. “We call upon President Biden to prioritize this funding in his 2023 budget proposal and to work with us and local election officials to ensure we have the support required to run secure and accessible elections for the short and long-term.”

On Tuesday, the Election Infrastructure Initiative — which, like the letter, is associated with the nonpartisan Center for Tech and Civic Life, released a report that claims state and local governments need $53 billion over 10 years to modernize election infrastructure.

“Election administration is one of this country’s most decentralized tasks. More than 10,000 jurisdictions, nearly all at the county or city level, manage our country’s elections. Each jurisdiction is responsible for funding its own election infrastructure,” the report states. “And dangerously for our democracy, that funding has not kept up with the deep and accelerating needs posed by cybersecurity threats, physical threats to election staff, and the growing need to provide voting options across different modalities, including in-person on election day, mail voting, and early voting.”


Read More

US Capitol building
The United States Capitol building with its white dome against a blue sky

Would Congressional Term Limits Make Congress Better—or Worse?

Starting in the 1990’s, the idea of putting term limits on members of Congress became a recurring idea to reform the institution and improve democracy. The idea was born out of the theory that replacing the current crop of legislators with a new batch would produce a better Congress. More than 30 years later we now have quantitative and qualitative data showing the impact of term limits.

Twenty-one state legislatures have enacted some kind of term limit on legislators since 1990. Since then, dozens of academic studies have examined the impact on such factors as: complexity of legislation, influence of lobbyists and staff on legislative outcomes, and interactions with constituent. Here are some key findings.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand points to the word tax on a screen

Data calculations

Getty Images

Inconvenient Numbers Are a Sign the System Works

Earlier in October, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that consumer prices rose 3.7 percent over the past year, a little higher than the month before, with gasoline accounting for more than half of September's increase. Rising prices are the kind of news no incumbent politician wants weeks before an election. The report was published anyway, on schedule. That is the quiet discipline of a trustworthy statistical system. It tells us what is true even when the number is unwelcome to whoever holds power.

So, do Americans trust government data? We do. But that trust is incomplete, and it has room to grow.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

jimfeng/Getty Images

Pennsylvania’s Bipartisan Exchange Is Rebuilding Trust in Governance

The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics has nearly 40 years of experience working with legislators from different political parties, and it is building on this history by drawing on lessons from the successful American Congressional Exchange model, begun in 2018 at the Bipartisan Policy Center, and from state exchanges now underway in Minnesota and Michigan. The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics, in collaboration with the Bridge Alliance, has launched the Pennsylvania Legislative Exchange.

This state-based, systematic approach is designed to foster better relationships and build trust across the political aisle with the following guiding principles:

Keep ReadingShow less
An empty grocery cart in a market.

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani proposes five city-run grocery stores. See the arguments for and against, from food deserts to bodega concerns and the $70M cost.

Getty Images, Kwangmoozaa

Government-Owned Grocery Stores: Accessible Nutrition or Government Overreach?

Issue Introduction

Over the past few years, affordability has become the most central issue affecting Americans and the quality of life in the United States. The prices of groceries and basic necessities have risen 25-30% since the COVID-19 pandemic and are projected to rise another 3.2% in 2026. At the same time, the exodus of grocery chains from rural and low-income areas has scattered food deserts throughout individual states. Recent mass closures include Grocery Outlet’s shuttering of 36 stores and continued shut-downs of many Albertsons locations. These factors have led politicians to make affordability a major campaign issue.

During his progressive campaign for mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani raised the idea of opening grocery stores owned and operated by the city government to provide New Yorkers with affordable groceries. In his April 2026 public address that marked his first 100 days in office, Mayor Mamdani announced plans for the first of five city-run grocery stores. Mamdani’s proposed initiative will use $70 million in capital funding to build five city-owned municipal stores–one in each borough–and place them under control of the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC). NYCEDC will then select third-party operating staff in accordance with city standards for affordability and proper labor practices. Public opinion following the announcement continues to be divided between uproar and support.

Keep ReadingShow less