Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

New Mexico eyed as next partisan battleground for voting by mail

Mail-in ballots
George Frey/Getty Images

A legal and public relations fight over switching New Mexico's primaries to vote-by-mail is quickly becoming the hottest new partisan standoff over elections during the deadly spread of Covid-19.

The state's balance of political power is the opposite of Wisconsin, where citizens donned masks and rubber gloves to protect them from the coronavirus and went to their polling places this week at the insistence of the Republicans in charge of both the courts and the state capital.

Now, law firms aligned with national Republicans have joined the state GOP in suing to stop plans to send absentee ballots to almost 1 million New Mexicans in time for the June 2 election. The Democrats who control the government are fighting back at the state Supreme Court, and their chances look decent because it too is dominated by liberals.


With Joe Biden now unopposed, the fight is no longer important in the Democratic presidential contest. But the outcome will influence turnout in dozens of races for both parties' nominees for the Legislature and Congress, particularly a hard-fought contest for the open House seat centered on Santa Fe.

Moreover, it will help decide which side gets momentum in the suddenly pitched battle over expanding the use of absentee ballots to make voting safer during the pandemic.

Democracy reformers, voting rights groups and their Democratic allies in Congress thought they had gained an edge in the public health emergency's early going, confident they could secure more after winning $400 million for states to expand vote-by-mail in last month's economic rescue package.

But President Trump, even though he voted absentee in both 2016 and 2018, has come out vigorously this week against any broad expansion of the practice, labeling it "very dangerous," "corrupt" and an invitation to help "cheaters" without offering evidence.

Universal mail voting "shouldn't be allowed!" he tweeted Wednesday evening, as both sides in the New Mexico dispute filed legal briefs and took to the microphones to make their cases

Clerks for 27 of the state's 33 counties have asked for permission to hold the primaries by sending absentee ballots to all voters registered with a political party and then restricting in-person voting locations to the disabled and non-English speakers. (Independents may not vote in the state's partian contests.)

Democratic Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver backs the plan, but the GOP wants to keep 100 polling places open across the state and limit the clerks to sending vote-by-mail request forms that would need to be submitted a week before the primary.

"Well, if you have bothered to go to the Walmart or the supermarket during these times, I suspect that the crowd there is just as dense as it would be at any single polling place," GOP Chairman Steve Pearce, a former congressman, t old the Santa Fe New Mexican.

"By trying to block us from doing the right thing for the voting public, they are basically saying it's better to put people's lives at risk than to do it a different way, and I think that's shameful," Toulouse Oliver replied.

Common Cause, the League of Women Voters, the American Civil Liberties Union and other voting rights groups filed briefs by Wednesday's deadline supporting the mail-in plan. The Democrat-dominated state Supreme Court will hear arguments by teleconference Tuesday.

One question is whether the switch would require approval of the solidly Democratic Legislature. While such an outcome would be assured politically, it could be extremely difficult to achieve in time, practically, because the lawmakers' annual session has ended and they don't have clear permission under state law to cast votes for legislation without being in the capital.

Two years ago Democrats won back the governor's office, secured all statewide elected offices and reinforced their majorities at the statehouse and Supreme Court. They also took a seat in Congress away from the GOP, so all five members of the state's delegation are now Democrats.,


Read More

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Crowd of people walking on a street.

Andy Andrews//Getty Images

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Biologist and author Paul Ehrlich, the most influential Chicken Little of the last century, died at the age of 93 this week. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” launched decades of institutional panic in government, entertainment and journalism.

Ehrlich’s core neo-Malthusian argument was that overpopulation would exhaust the supply of food and natural resources, leading to a cascade of catastrophes around the world. “The Population Bomb” opens with a bold prediction, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

People clear rubble in a house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026 in Tehran, Iran. The United States and Israel continued their joint attack on Iran that began on February 28. Iran retaliated by firing waves of missiles and drones at Israel, and targeting U.S. allies in the region.

Getty Images, Majid Saeedi

Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

Most of what we have heard from the administration as it pertains to the Iran War is swagger and bro-talk. A few days into the war, the White House released a social media video that combined footage of the bombardment with clips from video games. Not long after, it released a second video, titled “Justice the American Way,” that mixed images of the U.S. military with scenes from movies like Gladiator and Top Gun Maverick.

Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, War Secretary Pete Hegseth boasted of “death and destruction from the sky all day long.” “They are toast, and they know it,” he said. “This was never meant to be a fair fight... we are punching them while they’re down.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A student in uniform walking through a campus.

A Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadet walks through campus November 7, 2003 in Princeton, New Jersey.

Getty Images, Spencer Platt

Hegseth is Dumbing Down the Military (on Purpose)

One day before the United States began an ill-defined and illegal war of indefinite length with Iran, Pete Hegseth angrily attacked a different enemy: the Ivy League. The Secretary of War denounced Ivy League universities as "woke breeding grounds of toxic indoctrination” and then eliminated long-standing college fellowship programs with more than a dozen elite colleges, which had historically served as a pipeline for service members to the upper ranks of military leadership. Of the schools now on Hegseth’s "no-fly list," four sit in the top ten of the World’s Top Universities for 2026. So, why does the Secretary of War not want his armed forces to have the best education available? Because he wants a military without a brain.

For a guy obsessed with being the strongest and most lethal force in the world, cutting access to world-class schools is a bizarre gambit. It does reveal Hegseth doesn’t consider intelligence a factor–let alone an asset–in strength or lethality. That tracks. Hegseth alleges the Ivies infect officers with “globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks…” God forbid the tip of the sword of our foreign policy has knowledge of international cooperation and global interconnectedness. The Ivy League has its own issues, but the Pentagon’s claim that they "fail to deliver rigorous education grounded in realism” is almost laughable. I’m a veteran Lieutenant Commander with two Ivy League degrees, both paid for with military tuition assistance, and I promise: it was rigorous. Meanwhile, are Hegseth’s performative politics grounded in reality? Attacking Harvard on social media the eve of initiating a new war with a foreign adversary is disgraceful, and even delusional.

Keep ReadingShow less
Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?
Person working at a desk with a laptop and books.

Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?

Draft an important email without using AI. Write it from scratch — no suggestions, no autocomplete, and no prompt to ChatGPT to compose or revise the email.

Now ask yourself: Did it feel slower? Harder? Slightly uncomfortable?

Keep ReadingShow less