Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

High hurdles for an Ohio referendum to make voting much easier

Voting
Hill Street Studios/Getty Images

The push to put a broad easing of ballot access before Ohio voters this fall has suffered a big setback: Their sweeping proposal has been chopped into four pieces by the Republicans in charge of the process, quadrupling the proponents' signature-gathering work and potentially diluting momentum for their cause.

Ohioans for Secure and Fair Elections, the coalition of mostly left-leaning groups promoting the referendum and spearheaded by the state's branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, says it will appeal to the state Supreme Court to keep the package intact.

The groups say their aim is to boost turnout starting in 2022 in one of the nation's most populous political battlegrounds, which has been tilting from true purple toward a more Republican red in recent years.


The Ohio Ballot Board voted Monday, with the three GOP members in favor and the two Democrats opposed, to divide the single proposal into quarters — one about election procedures, one on voter registration, a third on the rights of disabled citizens and the last mandating post-election audits of the returns. The board concluded that's what's required under a state law that says proposed constitutional amendments put before the electorate must be confined to a single topic.

"To take a very large idea like 'every eligible voter should be able to cast a ballot in a convenient and efficient way,' that's something, that's something we can all get behind, but to say that's a single subject or purpose is a stretch," GOP Secretary of State Frank LaRose had argued.

Proponents said that was a subterfuge. "It's a strategic move on the part of the Republican Party to, you know, put the kibosh on this," asserted Don McTigue, a lawyer for the coalition.

Ohioans for Secure and Fair Elections, which had already collected petition signatures for the original proposal, must now collect at least 1,000 more on each of the four proposed amendments to be considered by the Ballot Board again. If its appeal is unsuccessful, the coalition would have until July 1 to collect 443,000 signatures from registered voters on each of the four proposals.

Central parts of the package would add Ohio to the roster of 16 states where eligible residents are automatically registered when the do business with the motor vehicle bureau; would permit registration and balloting on Election Day, like 21 other states; and would guarantee four weeks of in-person early voting.


Read More

Bad Bunny Super Bowl Clash Deepens America’s Cultural Divide

Bad Bunny performs on stage during the Debí Tirar Más Fotos world tour at Estadio GNP Seguros on December 11, 2025 in Mexico City, Mexico.

(Photo by Emma McIntyre/Getty Images)

Bad Bunny Super Bowl Clash Deepens America’s Cultural Divide

On Monday, January 26th, I published a column in the Fulcrum called Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl Halftime Show Sparks National Controversy As Trump Announces Boycott. At the time, I believed I had covered the entire political and cultural storm around Bad Bunny’s upcoming Super Bowl performance.

I was mistaken. In the days since, the reaction has only grown stronger, and something deeper has become clear. This is no longer just a debate about a halftime show. It is turning into a question of who belongs in America’s cultural imagination.

Keep ReadingShow less
Springsteen’s ‘Streets of Minneapolis’ Demands Justice Now

Bruce Springsteen on October 22, 2025 in Hollywood, California.

(Photo by Rodin Eckenroth/Getty Images for AFI)

Springsteen’s ‘Streets of Minneapolis’ Demands Justice Now

Bruce Springsteen didn’t wait for the usual aftermath—no investigations, no statements, no political rituals. Instead, he picked up his guitar and told the truth, as he always does in moments of moral fracture.

This week, Springsteen released “Streets of Minneapolis,” a blistering protest song written and recorded in just 48 hours, in direct response to what he called “the state terror being visited on the city of Minneapolis.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A woman typing on her laptop.

North Carolina's Project Kitty Hawk, an online program-management system built by the government, has been beset by difficulties and slow to grow despite good intentions.

Getty Images, Igor Suka

Online Learning Works Best When Markets Lead, Not Governments. Project Kitty Hawk Shows Why.

North Carolina’s Project Kitty Hawk is a grand experiment. Can a government entity build an online program-management system that competes with private providers? With $97 million in taxpayer funding, the initiative seemed promising. But, despite good intentions, the project has been beset by difficulties and has been slow to grow.

A state-chartered, university-affiliated online program manager may sound visionary, but in practice, it’s expensive, inefficient, and less adaptable than private solutions. In a new report for the James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal, I examined the experience of Project Kitty Hawk and argued that online education needs less government and more free markets.

Keep ReadingShow less
medical expenses

"The promise of AI-powered tools—from personalized health monitoring to adaptive educational support—depends on access to quality data," writes Kevin Frazier.

Prapass Pulsub/Getty Images

Your Data, Your Choice: Why Americans Need the Right to Share

Outdated, albeit well-intentioned data privacy laws create the risk that many Americans will miss out on proven ways in which AI can improve their quality of life. Thanks to advances in AI, we possess incredible opportunities to use our personal information to aid the development of new tools that can lead to better health care, education, and economic advancement. Yet, HIPAA (the Health Information Portability and Accountability Act), FERPA (The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act), and a smattering of other state and federal laws complicate the ability of Americans to do just that.

The result is a system that claims to protect our privacy interests while actually denying us meaningful control over our data and, by extension, our well-being in the Digital Age.

Keep ReadingShow less