Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Texas election security crackdown on the verge of death in the legislature

Voting rights advocates are breathing a cautious sigh of relief at the apparent (but not quite final) demise of legislation in Texas they viewed as among the most draconian to move in any state this year.

The bill gained notice not only because of its breadth of election law changes but because it was being pushed so hard by Republican leaders just as the second-most-populous state in the country is starting to turn purplish after a quarter-century in the bright red.

The state Senate passed it last month, but on Sunday the measure did not earn a place on the agenda for the final week the state House session for 2019.


The measure was a priority for the most influential Republican in Austin, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who hailed it as essential to assuring elections security. But the heart of the bill – giving counties five years to use voting machines that provide an auditable, voter-verifiable paper trail – was stripped out in recent days, causing the limited bipartisan support to evaporate.

Left in were a series of provisions that critics see as certain to scare away poor, elderly and disabled voters as well as the legions of volunteers needed to keep the voting lines moving on Election Day. The measure would make voting by someone ineligible a felony (it's now a misdemeanor). It would increase criminal penalties for providing false information on a registration application, boost police investigative powers over elections, allow partisan poll watchers into some voting booths and require those who assist people in getting to the polls to detail precisely why they did so.

"This is a huge win for voting rights and against voter suppression," Anthony Gutierrez, executive director of Common Cause Texas, said in a statement Sunday after the bill was left off the calendar. "These fights are not over and we continue to be vigilant in watching for attempts to amend pieces of SB 9 onto other bills."

Although the entire package is dead, individual sections could still be tacked on to unrelated bills in the whirlwind of the Legislature's final week.


Read More

​President Donald Trump and other officials in the Oval office.

President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office of the White House, Tuesday, Feb. 3, 2026, in Washington, before signing a spending bill that will end a partial shutdown of the federal government.

Alex Brandon, Associated Press

Trump Signs Substantial Foreign Aid Bill. Why? Maybe Kindness Was a Factor

Sometimes, friendship and kindness accomplish much more than threats and insults.

Even in today’s Washington.

Keep ReadingShow less
Powering the Future: Comparing U.S. Nuclear Energy Growth to French and Chinese Nuclear Successes

General view of Galileo Ferraris Ex Nuclear Power Plant on February 3, 2024 in Trino Vercellese, Italy. The former "Galileo Ferraris" thermoelectric power plant was built between 1991 and 1997 and opened in 1998.

Getty Images, Stefano Guidi

Powering the Future: Comparing U.S. Nuclear Energy Growth to French and Chinese Nuclear Successes

With the rise of artificial intelligence and a rapidly growing need for data centers, the U.S. is looking to exponentially increase its domestic energy production. One potential route is through nuclear energy—a form of clean energy that comes from splitting atoms (fission) or joining them together (fusion). Nuclear energy generates energy around the clock, making it one of the most reliable forms of clean energy. However, the U.S. has seen a decrease in nuclear energy production over the past 60 years; despite receiving 64 percent of Americans’ support in 2024, the development of nuclear energy projects has become increasingly expensive and time-consuming. Conversely, nuclear energy has achieved significant success in countries like France and China, who have heavily invested in the technology.

In the U.S., nuclear plants represent less than one percent of power stations. Despite only having 94 of them, American nuclear power plants produce nearly 20 percent of all the country’s electricity. Nuclear reactors generate enough electricity to power over 70 million homes a year, which is equivalent to about 18 percent of the electricity grid. Furthermore, its ability to withstand extreme weather conditions is vital to its longevity in the face of rising climate change-related weather events. However, certain concerns remain regarding the history of nuclear accidents, the multi-billion dollar cost of nuclear power plants, and how long they take to build.

Keep ReadingShow less
With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

Should the U.S. nationalize elections? A constitutional analysis of federalism, the Elections Clause, and the risks of centralized control over voting systems.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Why Nationalizing Elections Threatens America’s Federalist Design

The Federalism Question: Why Nationalizing Elections Deserves Skepticism

The renewed push to nationalize American elections, presented as a necessary reform to ensure uniformity and fairness, deserves the same skepticism our founders directed toward concentrated federal power. The proposal, though well-intentioned, misunderstands both the constitutional architecture of our republic and the practical wisdom in decentralized governance.

The Constitutional Framework Matters

The Constitution grants states explicit authority over the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections, with Congress retaining only the power to "make or alter such Regulations." This was not an oversight by the framers; it was intentional design. The Tenth Amendment reinforces this principle: powers not delegated to the federal government remain with the states and the people. Advocates for nationalization often cite the Elections Clause as justification, but constitutional permission is not constitutional wisdom.

Keep ReadingShow less