Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The war in Ukraine could restart action on voting rights legislation

Opinion

Destroyed building in Ukraine

Residents survey the wreckage after Russia fired missiles at a housing complex in Kyiv last month. One person was killed and 19 people were injured, including four children.

Andriy Dubchak/dia images via Getty Images

Simon is a technology consultant and a contributing author of “Leveraging: A Political, Economic and Societal Framework”.

The crisis in Ukraine should lead Americans to reflect on the political state in our country. The plight of the Ukrainian people, in and of itself, is a weighty issue. At the same time, the harsh reality of events in Ukraine could lead us toward strengthening the foundations of democracy at home.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine illustrates the fragility of democracy in general and, in particular, our democracy in the United States – notably, the importance of the democratic process, free and fair elections, the peaceful transition of power, and the rule of law.

The situation in Ukraine could, and should, be used as a springboard to build the case for securing voting rights in the United States. So far, Democrats in Congress have been unsuccessful in moving either the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act or the Freedom to Vote Act forward. By connecting the dots, they could leverage the crisis in Ukraine to create an effective communication strategy. The objectives would be grassroots support as well as influencing top-down thinking of moderate Republicans to elevate the importance of passing voting rights legislation.


We are all bombarded with graphic images of destruction from Ukraine via the 24-hour news cycle. Most people can distance themselves from these events since they are taking place 5,000 miles away and because we feel safe on U.S. soil. While the United States is not physically threatened by a neighboring country, the democratic process has become threatened internally. This issue was brought to the forefront when supporters of Donald Trump stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. By allowing narratives like the Big Lie about the 2020 election to perpetuate, we risk anti-democratic mechanisms taking hold in the country or within one political party.

More specifically, if Democrats can clearly articulate the association between physical attacks happening in Ukraine and ongoing attempts to chip away at the democratic process at home, we have a chance to turn the tide with some Republican lawmakers. The means to convey this message is to juxtapose the loss of basic human rights through the displacement of Ukrainian refugees with the loss of constitutional rights being threatened by restrictive voting laws being promoted in some states. We must not wait for harmful voting legislation to force U.S. citizens into refugee status – having to choose between remaining in their homes or moving their families to another state where voting rights are protected. This can only be prevented through legislation at the federal level.

An effective communication strategy must be grounded in reality in order to resonate with its intended audience. The proposed strategy connects the brutality of war in Ukraine with the risk of inaction on voting rights concerns. The intent would be to elicit a visceral reaction to this violence that logically and emotionally leads to internalizing the existential need to strengthen voting rights in America.

Proponents should convey to those who are not yet convinced that any political movement seeking to undermine the voting process could ultimately hurt either party – depending on who is in power at a given time. The current Republican leadership might view the obstruction of voting rights legislation as a means to bolster their political power in the short-term. However if we, as a country, diminish the voice of the voter, we limit our own autonomy as a representative of our constituents. The result being that our personal independence is relegated to the authoritarian party leadership, which we are dependent on to remain in office. Conversely, by supporting broad voting rights measures, Republicans will strengthen their own autonomy and the freedoms that are exercised throughout the democracy.

The United States, NATO members and many other nations are standing behind Ukraine and the tenets of freedom, sovereignty and self-determination against an oppressive, autocratic neighbor. By enabling Republican colleagues to see the authoritarianism of Vladimir Putin through a new lens, Democrats might help them to see how the aspirations of a Trumpist Republican Party could lead to unbridled authoritarianism in the United States.

Stated another way, allowing anti-democratic forces in the U.S. to chip away at democracy is akin to allowing Russia to continue to advance on Ukrainian cities, little by little, over a period of time, until there is no independent Ukraine left.

Similarly, if we allow the unfounded claims of voter fraud to lead to reduced access to voting rights in some states, we will enable authoritarian elements to take root. The challenge for Democrats is to gain buy-in from moderate Republicans.

Nothing has worked to date when it comes to swaying at least 10 Republicans in the Senate to break ranks and support voting rights bills. There’s a quote from Alexis de Tocqueville that characterizes it well:

“Everybody feels the evil, but no one has courage or energy enough to seek the cure.”

As Americans, we need to initiate a wake-up call to Republicans as a spark to muster the courage and energy needed to seek the cure. The link between the evil of Russian aggression and voter suppression in the U.S. offers an opening to gain bipartisan support for voting rights. The risk of inaction could lead to erosion of the very foundations of our democracy.


Read More

How Fairness, Stability and Freedom Can Help Us Build Demand for Transformative, Structural Change

Claiming Contested Values

FrameWorks Institute

How Fairness, Stability and Freedom Can Help Us Build Demand for Transformative, Structural Change

Claiming Contested Values: How Fairness, Stability and Freedom Can Help Us Build Demand for Transformative, Structural Change, produced by the FrameWorks Institute, explores how widely shared yet politically contested values can be used to strengthen public support for systemic reform. Values are central to how advocates communicate the importance of their work, and they can motivate collective action toward big, structural changes. This has become especially urgent in a climate where executive orders are targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, and some nonprofits are being labeled as threats based on their stated missions. Many civil society organizations are now grappling with how to communicate their values effectively and safely.

The report focuses on Fairness, Stability, and Freedom because they resonate across the U.S. public and are used by communicators across the political spectrum. Unlike values more closely associated with one ideological camp — such as Tradition on the right or Solidarity on the left — these three values are broadly recognizable but highly contested. Each contains multiple variants, and their impact depends on how clearly advocates define them and how they are paired with specific issues.

Keep ReadingShow less
America’s Human Rights Reports Face A Reckoning Ahead of Feb. 25th
black and white labeled bottle
Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

America’s Human Rights Reports Face A Reckoning Ahead of Feb. 25th

The Trump administration has already moved to erase evidence of enslavement and abuse from public records. It has promoted racially charged imagery attacking Michelle and Barack Obama. But the anti-DEI campaign does not stop at symbolic politics or culture-war spectacle. It now threatens one of the United States’ most important accountability tools: the State Department’s annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices.

Quiet regulatory changes have begun to hollow out this vital instrument, undermining America’s ability to document abuse, support victims, and hold perpetrators to account. The next reports are due February 25, 2026. Whether they appear on time—and what may be scrubbed or withheld—remains an open question.

Keep ReadingShow less
Reducing the Influence of Money in Presidential Politics is Within Our Reach, from where we Least Expect it: the Electoral College

American flag funnel with money

Illustration provided

Reducing the Influence of Money in Presidential Politics is Within Our Reach, from where we Least Expect it: the Electoral College

Reducing the influence of money pouring into presidential politics since the 2010 Citizens United decision may actually be possible by addressing the "winner-take-all" (WTA) structure of the Electoral College. By changing how electoral votes are allocated, the incentive to concentrate money in a few swing states could be reduced.

The winner-take-all (WTA) feature of the Electoral College narrows the focus of massive campaign expenditures in a “Funnel Effect”* to a handful of closely divided battleground states. Because candidates have little to gain from spending in states where they are comfortably ahead or hopelessly behind, they concentrate all their financial resources on 15 or 16 states, or in some cycles, as few as seven key swing states. All this could change if the "battleground state" phenomenon were taken away from the wealthy, as the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) would accomplish.

Keep ReadingShow less