Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The state of voting: Dec. 5, 2022

voting legislation updates

This weekly update summarizing legislative activity affecting voting and elections is powered by the Voting Rights Lab. Sign up for VRL’s weekly newsletter here.

The Voting Rights Lab is tracking 2,213 bills so far this session, with 583 bills that tighten voter access or election administration and 1,061 bills that expand the rules. The rest are neutral, mixed or unclear in their impact.

Georgia is conducting its first runoff general election since a state law truncated the runoff timeline. Among stories lauding historic single-day turnout numbers are many detailing hours-long lines and the fact that thousands of mail ballots were sent too late for voters to return them by the required deadline.

Elsewhere, lawmakers in Missouri prefiled legislation to restore voting eligibility to people with past felony convictions immediately upon release from incarceration. Rhode Island’s incoming secretary of state named same-day registration legislation and the implementation of a new online mail ballot request system as his top priorities in 2023.

Looking ahead: After postponing consideration of the bill last week, an Ohio House committee may hear legislation this week that would restrict mail voting, limit secretary of state authority, and make the state’s voter ID law stricter.

Here are the details:


Georgia’s new truncated runoff period leads to long lines, delayed mail ballots. In the first runoff general election since last year’s S.B. 202 was enacted, voters across Georgia experienced hours-long lines at early voting locations, including multiple days of three-hour lines in Savannah. S.B. 202 cut the time between the November election and the runoff in half, reduced the number of required early voting days for runoff elections from 17 to five, and eliminated all required weekend days – though some counties did choose to offer the option. The new law also made it a felony to provide food and beverages to voters waiting in line.

In addition to long lines, the truncated timeline seems to have also resulted in problems with mail voting. In Cobb County, part of the Atlanta metro area, thousands of mail ballots were not sent out to voters until eight days before Election Day, which is the deadline for receipt of completed ballots by election officials. On Friday, a Cobb County Superior Court judge issued an injunction ordering the county to accept ballots received by Dec. 9, three days after runoff election day, so long as they were postmarked by the close of polls.

Ohio House committee may move a restrictive elections bill this week. Last week the Ohio House of Representatives’ Government Oversight Committee postponed consideration of a substitute to H.B. 294 that would restrict acceptable forms of voter ID, limit secretary of state authority, prohibit prepaid postage for mail ballots and remove provisions from the bill establishing automatic voter registration, among other changes. The committee is expected to hold additional hearings this week.

Prefiled legislation in Missouri would restore voting eligibility to people with past felony convictions. H.B. 248 would restore the ability to vote for people with past felony convictions upon release from incarceration. The Senate companion bill has not yet been assigned a bill number. Under current Missouri law, people with past felony convictions may not vote until they complete all relevant terms of parole and probation. If this legislation passes, Missouri will join the 23 other states where people with past felony convictions may vote immediately upon release from incarceration.

Incoming Rhode Island secretary of state cites same-day registration and online mail ballot requests as priorities. Secretary of State-elect Gregg Amore named legislation establishing same-day registration and the implementation of an online mail ballot request system, already authorized by this year’s S.B. 2007, as his top priorities.


Read More

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
​U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth testifies during a Senate Committee on Appropriations hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on July 21, 2026. Hegseth is crafting a strong and masculine identity for his audience as he reportedly contemplates a presidential run.

(Alex Wroblewski/AFP/Getty Images/TNS)

Politicians Can’t Just ’Give the People What They Want’

For reasons that will baffle my many detractors, I am often asked for advice about being an opinion journalist. One of my standard responses is: You have to be willing to disappoint your biggest fans.

What I mean is that if you start to see your job as telling fans what they want to hear, you risk becoming an entertainer rather than a thinker, and eventually you become a caricature. I’ve seen it happen numerous times. Patrick Buchanan was a brilliant columnist and a serious person. But over the course of his career, he listened too much to the people who said, “Go Pat, go!” and too little to friends who said, “I think that’s taking it too far.”

Keep ReadingShow less
White marble exterior of the United States Capitol, often called the Capitol Building, is the home of the United States Congress and the seat of the legislative branch of the U.S. federal government

Congress approval is at a record-low 10%. Moderation and consensus-building, not partisan theatrics, are how Washington gets problems solved.

Richard Sharrocks / Getty Images

Reclaiming the Politics of the Possible

Washington is stuck in a cycle of performative conflict. The incentives seem to reward outrage, not outcomes that last; purity tests, not problem‑solving. So it’s no surprise that after three shutdowns in less than a year, public approval of Congress collapsed to just 10 percent this spring. (Gallup, April 2026.) But the country we live in — where many middle-income families report persistent financial strain and businesses are navigating unprecedented technological upheaval — cannot be governed by theatrics. Breaking this cycle requires moderation, consensus‑building, and a cooperative approach to governance.

This is not a call for centrism as an ideology. Instead, this is a call for transformative leaders to embrace moderation as their governing strategy, recognizing that in a pluralistic country of nearly 350 million people durable solutions require broad and stable alliances. Ultimately, this is a call for the 240 million of us who are eligible to vote in November to elect consensus-builders instead of bomb-throwers, and healers instead of arsonists.

Keep ReadingShow less
Adult man holds a microphone while asking a question during a town hall meeting.

Congress ignored 90% of public support for background checks. Learn how citizen assemblies and sortition helped Ireland break gridlock and could work in the US.

SDI Productions/Getty Images

Consensus Without Power: How Sortition Could Break America's Legislative Gridlock

In April 2013, four months after the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting killed twenty children, the US Senate voted on the Manchin-Toomey Act to expand background checks and to include gun-show and internet sales of firearms. Roughly nine in ten Americans, including a majority of gun owners, supported the bill—a figure that has held steady across more than a decade of polling. It fell short of the 60-vote threshold by six votes. This was not an outlier. On complex issues, representatives often fail to translate public consensus into reality. Research shows that legislators consistently vote in line with donor and interest group preferences over constituent opinion. Before the vote, the National Rifle Association (NRA) warned every senator it would “rate” their vote on its annual rating system, and a low NRA rating could cost senators their next primary. Consequently, the bill died 54-46, and the majority of Americans watched, powerless, as their consensus was overridden by self-interested representatives.

Liberal democracies need a method to bypass electoral incentives that run counter to public opinion. One already exists: Ireland faced the same stalemate on complex issues before it instituted a process called sortition. The beauty of sortition lies in its removal of the primary pressure that misaligns representatives’ interests from public interest: reelection. Much like jury duty, citizens are randomly drawn from the population. An independent body then stratifies the pool, so the final group mirrors the country by age, gender, geography, and income. The group meets over weeks or months, hearing from experts and the public, as well as debating frequently. At the end, it issues a recommendation that parliament may then put to a referendum or pass into law.

Keep ReadingShow less