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

Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses
black video camera
Photo by Matt C on Unsplash

Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses

This week, I joined a coalition of journalists in Washington, D.C., to speak directly with lawmakers about a crisis unfolding in plain sight: the rapid disappearance of local, community‑rooted journalism. The advocacy day, organized by the Hispanic Technology & Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP), brought together reporters and media leaders who understand that the future of local news is inseparable from the future of American democracy.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Keep ReadingShow less
People wearing vests with "ICE" and "Police" on the back.

The latest shutdown deal kept government open while exposing Congress’s reliance on procedural oversight rather than structural limits on ICE.

Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

A Shutdown Averted, and a Narrow Window Into Congress’s ICE Dilemma

Congress’s latest shutdown scare ended the way these episodes usually do: with a stopgap deal, a sigh of relief, and little sense that the underlying conflict had been resolved. But buried inside the agreement was a revealing maneuver. While most of the federal government received longer-term funding, the Department of Homeland Security, and especially Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), was given only a short-term extension. That asymmetry was deliberate. It preserved leverage over one of the most controversial federal agencies without triggering a prolonged shutdown, while also exposing the narrow terrain on which Congress is still willing to confront executive power. As with so many recent budget deals, the decision emerged less from open debate than from late-stage negotiations compressed into the final hours before the deadline.

How the Deal Was Framed

Democrats used the funding deadline to force a conversation about ICE’s enforcement practices, but they were careful about how that conversation was structured. Rather than reopening the far more combustible debate over immigration levels, deportation priorities, or statutory authority, they framed the dispute as one about law-enforcement standards, specifically transparency, accountability, and oversight.

Keep ReadingShow less
ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You
A pole with a sign that says polling station
Photo by Phil Hearing on Unsplash

ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You

The brutality of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the related cohort of federal officers in Minneapolis spurred more than 30,000 stalwart Minnesotans to step forward in January and be trained as monitors. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s demands to Minnesota’s Governor demonstrate that the ICE surge is linked to elections, and other ICE-related threats, including Steve Bannon calling for ICE agents deployment to polling stations, make clear that elections should be on the monitoring agenda in Minnesota and across the nation.

A recent exhortation by the New York Times Editorial Board underscores the need for citizen action to defend elections and outlines some steps. Additional avenues are also available. My three decades of experience with international and citizen election observation in numerous countries demonstrates that monitoring safeguards trustworthy elections and promotes public confidence in them - both of which are needed here and now in the US.

Keep ReadingShow less