Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Warning of revived Russian meddling gives fresh rationale for election security bills

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said he Republican colleagues would "rather let Putin win than stand up to President Trump."

Alex Wong/Getty Images

The fresh warnings from intelligence officials that Russia is again intruding in the presidential race have given congressional Democrats an opening to revive their uphill push for election security legislation.

Several proposals for bolstering American democracy's protections against interference by foreign adversaries have passed the House but are stymied in the Senate, where GOP Majority Leader Mitch McConnell maintains they're unnecessary and designed by Democrats to get under President Trump's skin.

After news broke Thursday night about the warning delivered to lawmakers by the intelligence community's top election security official — who told them Russia is already at work meddling with the election in hopes of helping Trump win again — Minority Leader Chuck Schumer excoriated the GOP in particularly harsh terms.


"Republicans keep blocking election security bills in the Senate, and now we know why: They'd rather let Putin win than stand up to President Trump," he said on Twitter.

The unambiguously identified targeting of the presidential race by Vladimir Putin's government four years ago resulted in few identifiable hacks of voting systems, but it also included a sweeping online disinformation effort and has generated waves of uncertainty about the reliability of American elections. The new intelligence findings will only amplify that.

But it remains highly uncertain whether those reports will prompt any loosening of the Senate standoff when lawmakers return next week.

The measure taking clearest aim at Russia, dubbed the Deter Act, would impose sanctions on Russian finance, defense and energy businesses after a clear finding by U.S. intelligence that the Kremlin was interfering in the election. The measure has been sponsored by five Democrats but also six Republicans, including three of the party's most vulnerable incumbents this fall: Susan Collins of Maine and both of the senators Trump campaigned for this week: Corey Gardner of Colorado and Martha McSally of Arizona.

Four times in the past six months, the Democrats have made a choreographed show of taking the Senate floor to propose immediate passage of election security bills they view as less contentious than the Deter Act — knowing full well their efforts could (and would) be blocked by the GOP without any roll call votes.

The most recent effort came two weeks ago, when three measures that have passed the House in various forms were blocked. One would require presidential campaigns to call the FBI if they are approached by a foreign power offering assistance. Another would require candidates to report any efforts by a foreigner to make a campaign contribution. The last would authorize more federal money for election security and ban the use of voting machines connected to the internet or made overseas.


Read More

Person holding "Vote" sign.

Person holding "Vote" sign.

Photo provided

Latino Voters Shift Ahead of Midterm Elections

Two years after providing historic levels of support that helped propel Donald Trump back to the White House, Latino voters are shifting rapidly away from the Republican Party. The realignment is driven by a potent combination of persistent economic anxieties and a sharp backlash against the administration’s aggressive domestic immigration crackdowns. A landmark national poll conducted by NBC News and Telemundo reveals that the President’s approval rating among registered Latino voters has plummeted to just 27%, signaling deep political turbulence for the GOP on the eve of critical midterm elections.

When asked by reporters outside the White House about the plunging numbers, President Trump angrily dismissed the data, labeling the findings as “fake news.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Person placing ballot in voting box

Person placing ballot in voting box

Getty Images

Who Gave the Federal Government the Right to Decide Who Can Vote?

The Trump administration is pressing to remove noncitizens from voter rolls across the country. Yet an important question seems to be missing from the debate: Where, exactly, does the federal government get the authority to impose a citizenship requirement on federal elections? The Constitution does not make citizenship a universal qualification for voting. Instead, Article I, Section 2, Clause 1 states: “The Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.” At the same time, Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 explicitly grants Congress authority over the conduct of federal elections: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.” In Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. (2013), the U.S. Supreme Court distinguished Congress’s power to regulate how federal elections are conducted from the states’ authority to determine voter qualifications, explaining that Congress may regulate the “Times, Places and Manner” of elections, “but not who may vote in them.” For much of American history, noncitizens voted in elections in at least 22 states and territories, and some historical research suggests the number may have been as high as 40. Today, certain noncitizens are still permitted to vote in local elections in California, Maryland, Vermont and the District of Columbia. If the Constitution leaves voter qualifications to the states, what gives the federal government the authority to demand otherwise?

A Long History of State Decisions

Keep ReadingShow less
USA Presidential voters on electoral college map

USA Presidential voters on electoral college map

Getty Images

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Federalism at Its Best

Federalism operates at its peak when states collaborate as a unified network rather than acting as isolated silos. While the American system traditionally views states as competitive "laboratories of democracy," pure isolationism limits policy success. When states pool resources, align regulations, and share data, they solve national problems faster without expanding federal bureaucracy.

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) represents federalism at its best by using explicit constitutional state powers to modernize the presidential election system without a constitutional amendment.

Keep ReadingShow less