Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Partisan accord on modernizing Indiana's campaign finance reporting

Indiana
JosephJacobs/Getty Images

Indiana legislators are finding unusual, if narrow, bipartisan agreement on money-in-politics regulation: allowing all Hoosier candidates to file their fundraising and spending reports online.

It sounds like a minor bookkeeping matter, but campaign finance watchdogs say such electronic filings produce more accurate and timely disclosures by politicians than when they're compelled to use pen and paper.


The Republican-majority General Assembly looks likely to pass legislation before adjourning in a month that would allow local candidates and campaign committees to file electronically, which the legislators themselves have been able to do for a few years. The House has already passed the measure and it won a rare 9-0 endorsement from the Senate Elections Committee on Monday.

It's "a reasonable ask" for counties "to move forward with technology," said the panel's GOP chairman, Greg Walker.

Currently, candidates file papers in person, through the mail or via fax machine — and their handwriting (especially the numbers) is often indecipherable. Another option is to fill in a PDF that is available on the state government's website, but it tends to not save properly and submits a report declaring the candidate did not raise or spend a penny.

The bill was pressed by Jessica Bailey, the new Democratic clerk in Porter County in the state's northwestern corner.

"It's something that's needed, and it will keep elections and candidate reports more transparent," she told the Post-Tribune of Northwest Indiana. "If things are simple and user friendly, people tend to do them on a regular basis."


Read More

The Word ‘Black’ Has Disappeared From a Set of Bills Aimed at Addressing Black Maternal Health

The Momnibus Act was previously known as the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act, but the word 'Black' has been removed from the title and appears only once across the latest package.

Emily Scherer for The 19th

The Word ‘Black’ Has Disappeared From a Set of Bills Aimed at Addressing Black Maternal Health

The word “Black” has been almost completely removed from a package of bills that have long been viewed as Congress’ main legislative vehicle to address the Black maternal health crisis, frustrating some advocates who feel Black women are being erased from the policy.

The key change this year is the title. The Momnibus Act — filed in mid-March — was called the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act in 2023; before that it was the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act of 2021 and the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act of 2020. None of the previous packages, which were championed by Democrats, have been enacted.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump Never Intended To Be Just

U.S. President Donald Trump on May 22, 2026 in Suffern, New York.

(Photo by Roberto Schmidt/Getty Images)

Trump Never Intended To Be Just

Let us set aside, for a moment, the fact that in suing the IRS, Donald Trump initiated a lawsuit that was meritless, frivolous, and a blatant conflict of interest…in his own words, “I am supposed to work out a settlement with myself.” Let us further acknowledge, but look past the fact, that the settlement is filled with “illegal cookies” like his effort to exempt himself and his family members or family-controlled companies, from past or future IRS audits or any future obligations to ever pay federal taxes.

Please appreciate, but set aside for a moment, that this is the most corrupt administration in modern US history. Further, I would like to ignore the fact that this appears to be an effort to finance a private militia that has violently sought to undermine the US Government and the electoral capacity of the vote of the people of the United States of America.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Fragile Promise of the Ballot
black and white love print crew neck shirt
Photo by Cyrus Crossan on Unsplash

The Fragile Promise of the Ballot

Recent Supreme Court decisions such as Shelby County v. Holder and Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee were not just redefinitions of election law; they marked a critical shift away from the federal government’s duty to ensure equal ballot access—a duty fundamental to democracy.

The consequences were swift and broad. Within hours, Shelby County, Texas, imposed strict voter ID rules that federal officials had previously blocked under the Voting Rights Act’s pre-clearance provisions. Soon after, North Carolina reduced early voting and eliminated same-day registration. Across parts of Alabama, Georgia, and other Southern states, polling places closed or moved, often in communities with large Black populations. What once required federal review could now proceed quickly.

Keep ReadingShow less