Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

More voting curbs advance under the GOP whip in Arizona, Florida and Ohio

voters in Arizona

A bill in Arizona would drop voters from the vote-by-mail list if they don't cast a ballot for four years.

Christian Petersen/Getty Images

Efforts to make voting more complicated have lurched forward this week in the Republican-run legislatures of three additional major partisan battlegrounds.

The Arizona House voted Tuesday to purge inconsistent voters from the roster of people who are sent a mail-in ballot before every election. Hours later in Florida, a Senate committee advanced a package of fresh restrictions on voting. And GOP powers in Ohio put the finishing touches on their own multifaceted plan to make access to the ballot box more difficult.

Business executives have joined Democrats and civil rights advocates to excoriate all those efforts as aiming to disenfranchise voters of color — an argument that has not stopped fresh curbs from being enacted this year, in the name of bolstered election security, in purple states from Georgia to Iowa and most recently Montana.


These are the details of the developments in the states with the freshest legislative activity:

Arizona

The measure is now one roll call, in the GOP-run Senate, away from the desk of Republican Gov. Steve Ducey.

The vote in the House was 31-29 along party lines, promoted mainly by Republicans who have continued to push the evidence-free allegation that fraud cost former President Donald Trump the state's 11 electoral votes last year.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Under their bill, people who don't return any ballot for any election for four years would be dropped from the roster of voters — which now includes three-quarters of Arizonans — who receive vote-by-mail packets before each election. (They would first get a warning they have 90 days to ask to stay on the list.)

About 200,000 voters, or one in five, sat out the primary and general elections in both 2018 and 2020 and would be subject to the purge. Republicans say the measure is justified to keep not-completed ballots out of the wrong hands. Democrats say the result would be confusion and ultimately suppression — especially of Latinos, Native Americans, young people and partian independents.

Greater Phoenix Leadership, a business group, and more than 50 company executives including the owner of the Arizona Cardinals have come out against the bill and two others that have not advanced as far in the Legislature, one to shrink the period for mail-in voting and the other to stiffen proof-of-identification requirements for those using the forms.

"These measures seek to disenfranchise voters. They are 'solutions' in search of a problem. They are attempts at voter suppression cloaked as reform — plain and simple," they said in an open letter last week, warning that passage could taint the state's reputation as a good place to live and work.

President Biden was the first Democrat to carry the state in six elections, albeit by just 10,000 votes out of 3.3 million cast, and after the November election Arizona has two Democratic senators for the first time since 1968.

Florida

The Senate Rules Committee approved the bill, 10-7. One Republican joined every Democrat in opposing it, despite GOP sponsors abandoning some of the more aggressive ideas in their original package — including intensified signature-matching rules for voters and an outright ban on drop boxes.

Instead, the bill would make drop boxes available only during early voting hours, not around the clock. It also would bar political operations from delivering water to voters within 150 feet of a polling place, add more ID requirements to vote-by-mail applications, end the ability of voters to be on a permanent roll to receive an absentee ballot for each election, limit third-party collections of ballots and boost the powers of partisan observers during vote tabulation.

As in other states, the debate was between Republicans who said they wanted to prevent cheating that otherwise "could happen," and Democrats who said that warding off a hypothetical was much less of a problem than suppressing the vote.

As approved, the measure is quite similar to a bill awaiting a vote in the Republican-majority House. But unless identical language wins passage in both chambers by the end of next week, when the Legislature adjourns, no voting bill will be presented to GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis this year. Florida has for a decade been considered the biggest purple state, but Republicans have won every topflight statewide contest in the past five years.

Ohio

Republican legislators and GOP Secretary of State Frank LaRose say they are close to unveiling an election law overhaul proposal they believe can win bipartisan backing.

But a draft of the legislation that circulated last week prompted state House Democtatic Leader Emilia Sykes to send out a fundraising email describing the bill as "so draconian that the Georgia law looks mild in comparison."

That draft would ban ballot drop boxes, require two forms of ID to vote early or by mail, and eliminate early-in person balloting the Monday before the election. But negotiators say they are also considering a collection of proposals to ease voting, including a new online system and a later deadline to apply for an absentee ballot.

One draft version would prohibit the state from paying the postage on returned absentee ballots. Another would mandate postage-paid envelopes with all ballot request forms and ballots.

Unlike many other states, the Ohio Legislature meets all year — so there is plenty of time to alter rules ahead of the next election, when the marquee race in Ohio will be for an open, now-Republcian-held Senate seat. Trump secured its 18 electoral votes twice, meaning last year was the first time since 1860 that Ohio did not vote for the presidential victor.

Read More

The Second Dimension of Our Current Politics

Donkey V Elephant

Getty Images//Stock Photo

The Second Dimension of Our Current Politics

Politics has felt weird for a while now. From Donald Trump himself to the noteworthy rise of populist sentiment that is affecting both parties, many informed people are left scratching their heads trying to understand what has come over the country. The American economy, historically the number one issue for voters, is the “envy of the world” according to a recent special report by The Economist; crime and illegal immigration are also down. Yet the 2024 presidential election was a decisive rebuke of the current administration, resulting in Trump leading the Republican party to its largest win in a presidential election since 1988.

Many postmortem conversations have focused on whether Kamala Harris should have run further to the right or the left and focused more attention during her abbreviated campaign on popular social or economic issues. This one-dimensional view of the right-left political spectrum, with traditional conservatism on one end and redistributive socialism on the other, comes up short in describing our current politics. It is only through recognizing the class dimension of political appeal, whereby some candidates tailor their message to the priorities of the educated, cosmopolitan class, and others tailor their message to the concerns of the working class that recent political contests can be better understood.

Keep ReadingShow less
Examining Why DEI Efforts Often Fall Short and How to Foster Effective Change

Diversity illustration concept shows different ethnicity and style of people walking on the street, the contrast of people showing individuality characteristics.

Getty Images//Stock Photo

Examining Why DEI Efforts Often Fall Short and How to Foster Effective Change

“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” - Buckminster Fuller

What if I told you that most organizations’ DEI initiatives were doomed from the start? That their failure could have been predicted and even avoided?

Keep ReadingShow less
Meta ditches fact-checkers: What it means for the rest of us

CEO of Meta, Mark Zuckerberg is seen during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing with representatives of social media companies at the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Wednesday January 31, 2024 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Matt McClain/The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Meta ditches fact-checkers: What it means for the rest of us

This week, Meta announced that it would be ending relationships with its vast global network of fact-checking partners – organizations like Factcheck.org, Politifact, and the Associated Press that have been flagging falsehoods on the platform since 2017. In making the announcement, CEO Mark Zuckerberg claimed these partners were making “mistakes” and engaging in “censorship” and that it was time to “restore free expression” across Meta properties.

Platforms, journalists, civil society organizations and regular folks have long relied on fact-checkers to debunk the falsehoods polluting our information ecosystem. These journalists are trained to research claims and report the facts in accordance with standards set by the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) and its European counterpart, the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN). All of Meta’s fact-checking partners were IFCN-approved; none took down content themselves.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Untold Costs of AI: The West Is Paying for the Future That Hasn’t Arrived

robot, technology, future, futuristic, business, tree, symbol

Getty Images//Stock Photo

The Untold Costs of AI: The West Is Paying for the Future That Hasn’t Arrived

Artificial intelligence (AI) has been heralded as a technological revolution that will transform our world. From curing diseases to automating dangerous jobs to discovering new inventions, the possibilities are tantalizing. We’re told that AI could bring unprecedented good—if only we continue to invest in its development and allow labs to seize precious, finite natural resources.

Yet, despite these grand promises, most Americans haven’t experienced any meaningful benefits from AI. It’s yet to meaningfully address most health issues, and for many, It’s not significantly improving our everyday lives, excluding drafting emails and making bad memes. In fact, AI usage is still largely confined to a narrow segment of the population: highly educated professionals in tech hubs and urban centers. An August 2024 survey by the Federal Reserve and Harvard Kennedy School found that while 39.4% of U.S. adults aged 18-64 reported using generative AI, adoption rates vary significantly. Workers with a bachelor's degree or higher are twice as likely to use AI at work compared to those without a college degree (40% vs. 20%), and usage is highest in computer/mathematical occupations (49.6%) and management roles (49.0%).

Keep ReadingShow less