Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Move to revamp elections in Orange County faces GOP resistance

Supervisors in California's Orange County are set to reconsider a proposed sweeping overhaul of election procedures, including the elimination of precinct polling places in favor of voting centers.

Proponents say the switch, which could be implemented in time for the 2020 primaries, would save $29 million annually while making it more convenient to cast ballots in the third biggest (and most politically competitive) county in the most populous state. They also say it would speed the tabulation of results, which were delayed for so long last fall that the outcome of several close congressional races hung in the balance for more than a week.


But some Republicans have opposed the idea, already in place in Sacramento and four other California counties, saying the altered system could confuse voters and encourage voter fraud. So, when the GOP majority on the Board of Supervisors meets Tuesday it may reject the plan for the second time in three years.

The Orange County Register describes the proposed new system this way: "The county would replace its 1,200 precincts polls with 188 vote centers. It would open the facilities 10 days prior to elections to give locals more time to vote in person. All of the county's 1.6 million registered voters automatically would receive mail ballots. And the county would install nearly 100 military-grade secure drop boxes where people could deposit their ballots at any time up through Election Day."


Read More

Hand placing VOTE sticker on shirt

Hand placing VOTE sticker on shirt

Photo provided

The Latino Vote Keeps Changing. Why Do We Keep Calling It a Realignment?

After the 2024 presidential election, the headlines suggested that Latino voters were moving toward the Republican Party. Donald Trump’s gains were interpreted as evidence of a possible political realignment, particularly among working-class Latino voters and younger men.

Two years later, the story has reversed. Latino voters, we are told, are returning to the Democrats.

Keep ReadingShow less
President Donald Trump and Stephen Miller

President Donald Trump departs a roundtable discussion on cybercrime with White House Deputy Chief of Staff and Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller (R) in the East Room of the White House on October 21, 2026, in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Trump’s Elevation of Stephen Miller Proves His Promise to Work With Democrats Is a Farce

In the immediate aftermath of Tuesday’s sweeping midterm election losses, a chastened President Donald Trump struck an unusually conciliatory tone, signaling a willingness to work with Democrats. But the spirit of bipartisanship proved fleeting.

By forcing out Susie Wiles and elevating Stephen Miller to White House Chief of Staff, Trump has delivered a definitive, defiant message to the American electorate: the era of uncompromising grievance and division isn't over—it is being supercharged.

Keep ReadingShow less
economics graph on blackboard

economics graph on blackboard

Getty Images

What Post-1971 Supply-side Economics Has Done to Veterans

Post-1971 supply-side economics—often referred to as "trickle-down economics" or "Reaganomics” fundamentally transformed the relationship between the federal government and military veterans. The year 1971 marked the end of the Bretton Woods system, the closing of the gold window, and a pivot toward neoliberal economic frameworks that prioritized deregulation, sweeping tax cuts, and aggressive federal deficit reduction via domestic spending cuts.

For veterans, who had previously benefited from the expansive, New Deal-style social investments of the original G.I. Bill, this macroeconomic paradigm shift led to four distinct structural consequences:

Keep ReadingShow less
Bank sign
The bank of ornate classical columns and facade
Photo by Leo_Visions on Unsplash

A Bank Account Should Not Come with a Political Litmus Test

The ongoing appetite for "debanking"—pressuring financial institutions to cut off customers because of who they are, what they believe, or with whom they associate—should concern everyone. Why? Because in the end, anyone can become an easy target.

One pressure point has been protests against private banks whose customers are companies who build or operate immigration detention facilities under contracts with the Trump administration. The Boston area saw such protests earlier this year, and there have been others.

Keep ReadingShow less