Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Senate Republicans reluctant to consider election security measures

U.S. intelligence agencies agree on the importance of improving election security. But like with most other policy issues that could be on the table this year, politics is getting in the way of any solutions.

As the McClatchy DC Bureau reported, "partisanship has all but killed any chance that Congress will pass legislation to shore up election security before voters cast their ballots next year."

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has slammed the door on any vote on House Democrats' political overhaul legislation, which includes election security measures that would provide grant funding for states to upgrade voting equipment, train election officials on cybersecurity and conduct post-election audits.


McConnell's opposition to the House-passed bill, known as HR 1, has less to do with his aversion to election security, however, than his distaste for the bill's other proposals, such as new campaign finance restrictions.

And yet, Republican leadership appears to be lukewarm on a different Senate bill focused solely on election security — one that has bipartisan support.

The Secure Elections Act introduced last year aims to improve cybersecurity information-sharing between federal agencies and state election officials, offer election-security grants and provide security clearances to state election officials. The bill was authored by Republican Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma and Democratic Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Kamala Harris of California.

Despite bipartisan backing, the legislation has hit a brick wall in the Senate Rules and Administration Committee, which has jurisdiction over election security legislation.

Rules Chairman Roy Blunt, a Republican from Missouri, said he has no plans to discuss the bill because McConnell is not inclined to bring up "even a GOP-led election bill to the floor for fear Democrats might try to amend it" with provisions plucked from HR 1.

"The House action on election legislation has actually made it even less likely that that bill could possibly be on the Senate floor," Blunt said. "Their [H.R. 1] bill was a combination of everything that Democrats have wanted to do over the past 20 years all put into one big bill. ... That bill's just not going to go to the floor. Neither is any other bill that opens the door to these issues. Leader gets to decide that and he has made it clear."


Read More

A gavel.

A retired Texas Supreme Court chief justice discusses threats to judicial independence, partisan judicial elections, and public trust in the courts.

Getty Images, David Talukdar

Judicial Independence: The Cornerstone of America’s Democracy

Judicial independence was one of the core justifications for the American Revolution.

The Declaration of Independence assailed King George III, saying:

Keep ReadingShow less
THE POLITICS OF EXCLUSION: When Abuse of Power Pushes Communities Out of the American Story

An opinion essay traces America's cycle of welcoming immigrants and communities of color for labor, then excluding them once they gain power.

Westend61/Getty Images

THE POLITICS OF EXCLUSION: When Abuse of Power Pushes Communities Out of the American Story

The politics of exclusion is the deliberate use of power to push certain communities out of the American story through fear, cruelty, erasure, and unequal treatment. It is what happens when leaders abandon constitutional ideals and replace them with grievance, retaliation, and division.

The late John McCain warned that we weaken our greatness when we confuse patriotism with tribalism. Liz Cheney cautioned that no one should support a leader who uses fear and division to hold onto power. Adam Kinzinger called it authoritarianism. Mitt Romney said plainly, “He has caused fear and division.” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez observed that “the cruelty is the point,” and the late John Lewis reminded us that “democracy is not a state; it is an act.” Together, these voices describe the elephant in the room. America is confronting a pattern bigger than corruption and bigger than authoritarian drift. It is the social, racial, and moral dimension of democratic erosion — lying, cheating, cruelty, intimidation, erasure, and exclusion masquerading as patriotism.

Keep ReadingShow less
Senators Criticize Trump Administration’s Demands to Access Health Data as a Condition for Lifesaving Aid
Roberto “Bear” Guerra/ProPublica. Source image: Getty Images

Senators Criticize Trump Administration’s Demands to Access Health Data as a Condition for Lifesaving Aid

What Happened: Citing reporting by ProPublica, eight Democratic U.S. senators have criticized the Trump administration’s demands to access the health data of millions of people as a condition of giving lifesaving aid to other countries. In a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the senators, including minority leader Chuck Schumer, said the U.S. demands were “unprecedented and at odds with U.S. policy concerning the data of American citizens.”

The inquiry into the administration’s approach to foreign health data referred to a ProPublica story published in June about agreements the U.S. struck with African countries — and the risks they posed to people there. Experts told ProPublica that the deals are vague and lack language used in most data-sharing agreements to adequately limit what information is collected and how it can be used. As a result, they said, there is an increased risk that individuals’ personal data could be exposed, misused or commercialized without their consent.

Keep ReadingShow less
Illustration of US Capitol

Illustration of US Capitol

Illustration provided

Are States and Localities Required to Cooperate with ICE?

Polls show a majority of Americans disapprove of how Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is doing its job, with outrage stoked by a surge in immigration arrests across the country and multiple killings by federal immigration officials. In many places, residents are against their state and local officials cooperating with immigration authorities. And many local law enforcement leaders argue that cooperating with federal immigration enforcement operations undermines public safety by taking resources away from local priorities and eroding communities’ trust in law enforcement.

Trump administration officials have repeatedly argued that states and localities are legally obligated to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement efforts. They have also warned that state and local laws limiting cooperation with ICE will be met with harsh crackdowns.

Keep ReadingShow less