Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Arkansas anti-gerrymander group joins fight for relief from signature rules

Arkansas state Senate districts
Arkansas Department of Transformation and Shared Services

Redistricting reformers in Arkansas are the latest to ask the courts to relax petition signature requirements in the time of coronavirus.

Arkansas Voters First filed a lawsuit Wednesday asking a federal judge to loosen the state's rules given the unprecedented circumstances.

While much of the focus at the intersection of democracy and the pandemic has centered on delayed primaries and altered rules for the November presidential contest, the plight of grassroots groups to register voters and get their measures on the ballot has also intensified.


A federal judge in Arizona this week dismissed a request from two ballot measure campaigns, which wanted permission to get signatures online instead of in person, while the top court in Massachusetts relaxed the timetables and signatures required from would-be candidates there.

But the number of court fights has so far been exceeded by those who have given up: At least 21 efforts to get proposals on the ballot in 11 states have been paused if not outright abandoned in the face of Covid-19, and legions of potential candidates across the country have put their aspirations on hold.

Arkansas Voters First wants the people to be allowed to decide this fall to turn over the drawing of both congressional and legislative maps to an independent commission starting next year, after the census provides the population details for each state. Thirteen other states have already done so at least for some maps.

The maps drawn by the Republican-majority Arkansas General Assembly a decade ago have produced an all-GOP congressional delegation and a state Capitol in Little Rock where just a quarter of the lawmakers are Democrats -- even though the party got 35 percent of the statewide vote two years ago. Only seven states have a more partisan gerrymandered set of maps, according to the University of Southern California's Schwarzenegger Institute.

Polling by Arkansas Voters First found 58 percent in favor of an independent commission.

"We don't have the luxury of waiting until next year," said the group's director, Bonnie Miller. "If we are denied access to the ballot this year, Arkansas could be stuck with unfair and unrepresentative districts for another 10 years."

State law requires 89,000 registered voters to sign a petition in the presence of a canvasser by July 3, and the group said it had only begun the process when the pandemic took hold. GOP Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson is one of only eight governors who has never issued a stay-at-home order, however.

The anti-gerrymandering group wants the federal court to suspend the witness requirement, reduce the signature minimum, extend the deadline and permit the use of electronic signatures.

"Every voice should be heard in our democracy, and every vote should count equally," said Paul Smith of the Campaign Legal Center, which is representing the group. "Arkansans deserve the right to decide whether their voting district maps will be drawn by a neutral commission or politicians pursuing a partisan agenda."


Read More

California Voters Don’t Like Either Party. Good Thing the Primary Doesn’t Belong to The Parties.

California voters increasingly distrust both major parties. Here's why the state's Top Two primary gives independent voters more power to shape elections.

Image: Duncan Shelby on Alamy.

California Voters Don’t Like Either Party. Good Thing the Primary Doesn’t Belong to The Parties.

SAN DIEGO, Calif. - California voters have already received ballots for the June 2 primary, and the message they have going into these elections may not be what the political class wants to hear: They are not thrilled with either major party.

A recent analysis from the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) found that majorities of likely voters have unfavorable views of both parties—61% unfavorable toward the Democratic Party and 70% unfavorable toward the Republican Party.

Keep ReadingShow less
How the Voting Rights Act Reshaped Texas’ Electoral Maps

President Lyndon B. Johnson, Martin Luther King Jr., Clarence Mitchell Jr., Patricia Roberts Harris, and other guests at the signing of the Voting Rights Act on August 6, 1965.

Yoichi Okamoto - Lyndon Baines Johnson Library and Museum

How the Voting Rights Act Reshaped Texas’ Electoral Maps

In 2002, U.S. Rep. Henry Bonilla, a Republican, nearly lost his South Texas seat to Democrat Henry Cuellar. So when the GOP used its newfound majority in the state Legislature to redraw the voting maps the next year, they sawed through Cuellar’s hometown of Laredo and scattered Latino voters, who tended to vote Democratic, into other districts.

Latino advocacy groups sued under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the cornerstone provision of the law that prevents government bodies from diluting the voting power of specific groups. The Supreme Court found Texas lawmakers had taken away Latino voting power “because they were about to exercise it.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A group of people wait in line to get their ballots to vote in the election.

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact could reshape presidential elections as Midwest states debate Electoral College reform, political polarization, and the future of winner-take-all voting in America.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

700+ Proposed Amendments Failed, Midwest Voters Can Succeed

The Midwest served as the vanguard and ideological heartland of the Progressive Era, acting as a crucial laboratory for political, social, and economic reforms that later adopted national significance. Midwestern states (the cradle of the movement) pioneered anti-monopoly efforts, democratic, and social improvements.

After 770+ failed proposed U.S. Constitutional Amendments (the most on record for one issue) to remedy the factionalism (21st century polarization) feared by the Framers of the U.S. Constitution.

Keep ReadingShow less
“We Can’t Afford It” Is Never an Acceptable Excuse To Deny Independents a Vote

DC voting rights advocate Lisa D.T. Rice criticized the DC City Council for failing to fund Initiative 83’s semi-open primary system, leaving 85,000 independent voters unable to participate in taxpayer-funded primaries despite overwhelming voter approval in 2024.

Photo by Getty Images on Unsplash.

“We Can’t Afford It” Is Never an Acceptable Excuse To Deny Independents a Vote

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Lisa D.T. Rice spoke before the DC City Council during a Budget Oversight Hearing on May 1 to talk about Initiative 83, the semi-open primary and ranked choice voting measure she proposed that was approved by 73% of voters in 2024.

- YouTube youtu.be

Keep ReadingShow less