Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Want to vote on your phone? Election experts want to make it happen.

Online voting
alperguzeler/Getty Images

For many people, modern technology makes voting online a no-brainer. But implementing such a system nationwide presents many risks and challenges.

To assess the opportunities and pitfalls of remote digital voting, the Center for Security in Politics at the University of California, Berkeley announced Wednesday the formation of a working group that will rigorously study the issue. The goal is to develop best practices for election officials who want to offer safe and secure digital voting options.


While not yet widely used, digital voting is already an option for overseas military and civilian voters in 31 states and disabled voters in eight states. Proponents see it as an opportunity to make voting more accessible, especially during natural disasters or other emergencies.

The Covid-19 pandemic highlighted the need to further study the feasibility of online voting. A recent report by the Election Assistance Commission found online balloting rose in popularity during the 2020 election, when voters were taking advantage of new opportunities. In last year's general election, more than 330 jurisdictions across eight states used mobile voting.

"How people think about — and participate — in voting is changing," said Janet Napolitano, founder and faculty director for the Center for Security in Politics. "We cannot turn a blind eye to the lessons of the 2020 election or overlook the voters who face inherent barriers to voting. We need academically rigorous, evidence-based standards that will guide the development of safe and secure remote balloting technology."

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

There are no national standards regulating the use of remote digital voting, which presents security and privacy concerns. The working group will dive into the potential challenges of casting a ballot online, such as voter and device authentication and vote verification.

"As technology changes, we must continually reassess opportunities to keep voting not only safe, secure and resilient, but also accessible for all Americans," said Mike Garcia, a cybersecurity expert and member of the working group.

Many election security experts strongly oppose remote digital voting because they say it is highly susceptible to hacking and does not provide the paper backup one gets when voting by mail or in person. And for election officials in jurisdictions where it is allowed for certain voters, there is little guidance on best practices.

"Having a report from a balanced group of experts can help inform the discussion, and importantly give guidance to election officials who are frequently caught in the middle, unsure of what is the 'least dangerous' path forward," said Jeremy Epstein, a voting security expert and member of the working group.

In addition to Epstein, the working group will consist of academic researchers, election administrators, cryptographers, and cybersecurity and election security experts, including:

    • Ben Adida, executive director of VotingWorks.
    • Michelle Bishop, voter access and engagement manager at the National Disability Rights Network.
    • Allie Bones, assistant secretary of state for Arizona.
    • Josh Benaloh, senior cryptographer at Microsoft Research.
    • Henry Brady, professor in the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC, Berkeley.
    • Anthony Fowler, professor in the Harris School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago.
    • Michael Frias, CEO of Catalist.
    • Mike Garcia, a cybersecurity expert who previously worked at the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
    • Matt Masterson, former senior cybersecurity advisor at the Department of Homeland Security.
    • Amber McReynolds, founding CEO of the National Vote at Home Institute.
    • Maurice Turner, cybersecurity fellow at the Alliance for Securing Democracy.
    • Mark Weatherford, chief information security officer at AlertEnterprise and chief strategy officer at the National Cybersecurity Center.

    Read More

    Migrants sits on the ground facing Border Patrol agents

    U.S. Border Patrol agents detain migrants who camped in the border area near Jacumba, Calif.

    Katie McTiernan/Anadolu via Getty Images

    Do mass deportations cause job losses for American citizens?

    This fact brief was originally published by EconoFact. Read the original here. Fact briefs are published by newsrooms in the Gigafact network, and republished by The Fulcrum. Visit Gigafact to learn more.

    Do mass deportations cause job losses for American citizens?

    Yes.

    History shows mass deportations cause job losses for American citizens.

    The anti-immigrant efforts of the Kennedy, Johnson, Roosevelt and Coolidge administrations either “generated no new jobs or earnings” or “harmed U.S. workers’ employment and earnings,” according to PIIE.

    More recently, an analysis of President Obama’s deportation efforts found that deporting 500,000 immigrants causes around 44,000 job losses for U.S.-born workers.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    People eating Thanksgiving dinner
    The Good Brigade/Getty Images

    Thanksgiving dinner at the grown-ups’ table

    Lockard is an Iowa resident who regularly contributes to regional newspapers and periodicals. She is working on the second of a four-book fictional series based on Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice."

    With our national elections the first week and Thanksgiving the last week, November is a banner month for Americans. On Nov. 5 we voted, electing Donald J. Trump to become our 47th president and arguably the most powerful person on the planet. Now we look forward to Thanksgiving.

    Somewhere in each of our past Thanksgivings, there likely came a time when we were invited to join the adults at the grown-ups’ table. The most important qualification demonstrating we had earned this “promotion” was our behavior: We were expected to act like a grown-up. Maybe returning from college did it, or getting married. Perhaps we were bumped up earlier. Whenever it occurred, we understood we were being accorded a privilege. We had arrived.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    Donald Trump
    Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

    Trump wants to change the meaning of 'by the people'

    Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell professor of jurisprudence and political science at Amherst College.

    America held a free and fair election in which the majority’s preference for Donald Trump was clearly registered and will be respected. Unlike 2016, his election is no Electoral College fluke.

    If democracy depends solely on majority rule, democracy was on the ballot and it won. At least for now.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    People working in a vote counting center

    Election workers tabulate results of early voting and absentee ballots in Gwinnett County, Ga., on Nov. 5.

    Nathan Posner/Anadolu/Getty Images

    Officials ran a smooth election, silencing the false narrative around voter fraud

    Originally published by The 19th.

    Election officials across the country administered a relatively smooth 2024 general election, despite reports of bomb threats, technical issues and a polarizing online ecosystem that at times challenged the integrity of counting ballots.

    The predominately women-led workforce went into Election Day having readied for potential disruptions and a disinformation campaign that had swelled in the final weeks of the presidential race between Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Kamala Harris. But by early Wednesday, their processes for receiving and counting ballots — and a large enough vote margin in key battleground states — enabled major news outlets to project the former president’s win over the vice president shortly after midnight, days faster than in 2020.

    Keep ReadingShow less