Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

As Michigan GOP magnifies push to tighten election rules, a court gets in the way

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer

Michigan Republicans are considering a plan for circumventing Gov. Gretchen Whitmer so they can enact new election rules.

Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images

While Republican legislators in Michigan are intensifying their drive to enact the most aggressive voting curbs of the year, expecting such moves would help them in future elections, an earlier effort to preserve power has been blocked in court.

To be sure, the law struck down Monday by a federal appeals court theoretically benefits Republican and Democratic politicians equally. But the ruling could nonetheless make it tougher for the GOP's efforts to win back all three top statewide offices next year — by making it easier for minor party and independent candidates to run for those jobs.

The decision comes as Republicans in control of the Legislature have started mulling a plan for getting around Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in order to make access to the ballot box more difficult starting next year.


Cracking the major-party duopoly is a top cause of many democracy reformers, who believe rules ensuring red and blue ownership of the electoral map are a big cause for governing polarization and dysfunction.

So they were pleased with the 2-1 ruling from 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, which declared unduly burdensome the special ballot access requirements for people seeking statewide office who are not from a major party.

Those rules include collecting at least 30,000 signatures, with at least 100 from half of 14 congressional districts, by early summer in an election year — many weeks, in some years, before primaries or conventions that automatically land a Republican and Democrat on the ballot in November.

Only five states have a tougher signature threshold, the court said as it backed a lower court's ruling in favor of cutting the number to 12,000.

"All told, Michigan's system works to disadvantage independent candidates alone by requiring them to seek a significant number of signatures from an electorate that is not yet politically energized and to stake out positions in a race with yet undecided contours," Judge Karen Nelson Moore wrote in the majority opinion.

In dissent, Judge Richard Allen Griffin said the ballot access rules should be at the discretion of the Legislature and not open to judicial second-guessing.

In most recent elections, a handful of minor-party candidates have usually combined for about 2 percent statewide. Unless the case is successfully appealed to the Supreme Court, that roster and vote share will likely increase — with the outsiders no closer to victory, but maybe getting enough support to shape the outcome of a close Republican vs. Democratic contest.

Whitmer and two other Democrats, Attorney General Dana Nessel and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, are all expecting intense challenges to their re-elections in 2022 in what remains one of the nation's major political battlegrounds. And so they are all counting on strong turnout to continue the success that President Biden had in carrying the state by 3 points last fall, reversing Donald Trump's much narrower win four years before.

A key aspect of the GOP campaign strategy in the state, and many others, is to make voting more difficult. The new chairman of the Michigan party, Ron Weiser, is now encouraging an unusual strategy for accomplishing that goal.

While legislators in Lansing write a comprehensive measure restricting access to the ballot box — knowing that Whitmer will veto it — he wants Republicans to invoke the state's system for allowing the people to essentially have the last word instead of the governor. If the party can persuade 340,000 Michiganders to sign a special petition, then the Legislature would be permitted to enact the provisions mentioned in the petition without Whitmer's say-so.

A political committee to run the signature effort, Secure MI Vote, has already been formed.

Republicans unveiled a package of 39 voting restriction bills last week, repeating the arguments made by their colleagues in Georgia, Iowa and virtually every other battleground state's capital: New curbs are needed to assure election integrity and prevent fraud, even though Trump's insistence that he was robbed of re-election by such cheating has no basis in fact.

Among other things, the Michigan proposals would curb the powers of election boards in urban counties, limit voters without photo identification to casting provisional ballots, prevent the state from proactively sending absentee ballot applications to voters, require vote-by-mail applicants to present a copy of identification, bar local governments from paying the postage on ballots returned by mail, and restrict the use of drop boxes as an alternative.


Read More

Business meeting, blurred background and people in office for teamwork, collaboration and planning

Another recruitment drive won’t fix a nonprofit board. A practical guide to sharing real decision-making power with diverse members: acknowledge, affirm, act.

Jacob Wackerhausen/Getty Images

Before Recruiting Diverse Board Members, Examine Who Holds Power

Nonprofit leaders keep asking me where they will find the next generation of diverse board talent. My question is what those leaders will be allowed to change once they arrive. In this piece, I outline concrete steps boards can take to ensure diverse members have real opportunities to shape organizational decision-making and to translate good intentions into meaningful progress.

In my board service and consulting work, I hear the concern from executives and grassroots activists alike. They worry about recruiting successors, sustaining funding, and governing organizations whose work increasingly depends on partnerships beyond their own walls. I share those concerns. I also wonder whether another recruitment initiative will solve what troubles them.

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
Shadow on a wall of Judge hitting gavel in court, concept of justice, law, and legal protection

DOJ lawsuits in Alaska and California preview post-Election Day fights over certification and seating winners. Here’s how officials and voters can prepare.

Aitor Diago / Getty Images

The Lawsuits Will Lose. The Delays Will Still Win.

Less than two weeks before Election Day, President Trump’s Justice Department asked a federal court to stop Alaska from certifying its U.S. Senate race if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses to Democrat Mary Peltola. The lawsuit claims that a second candidate on the ballot, Daniel J. Sullivan, will confuse voters. That argument went nowhere in June, when the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that the state had no legal way to remove him from the ballot. Asked about the suit, the president took credit. “I’m the one that said do it,” he told reporters.

Alongside the Alaska suit, the Trump administration sued California to keep the state from counting mail ballots from 20,000 people it calls “likely” noncitizens. Over the summer, the Department of Homeland Security put that number at 190,000. Legal experts expect both suits to fail, as so many suits like them have. Still, Alaska and California give us an early look at what the weeks after November 3rd could bring: recount demands, calls to review or throw out ballots, and pressure to delay seating winners.

Keep ReadingShow less