Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The state of voting: July 25, 2022

The state of voting: July 25, 2022

The state of voting: July 25, 2022

This weekly update summarizing legislative activity affecting voting and elections is powered by the Voting Rights Lab. Sign up for VRL’s weekly newsletter here.


The Voting Rights Lab is tracking 2,185 bills so far this session, with 579 bills that tighten the rules governing voter access or election administration and 1,041 bills that expand the rules.

The Wisconsin Legislature rejected a rule allowing clerks to complete missing address details for ballot witnesses. And many Florida voters will need to update their voter registration files in order to vote by mail. Both of these issues could have major impact on the states’ August primary elections.

Delaware enacted no-excuse absentee voting and same-day registration. A Michigan court struck down a legislative practice that has been used to avoid submitting ballot initiative language to voters in its original form. California enacted a new law that will provide better transparency around signature verification.

Here are the details:

Delaware enacts no-excuse absentee voting and same-day registration. Governor John Carney signed into law S.B. 320, which opens mail voting to all registered voters and eliminates the state’s requirement that voters have a qualifying excuse to vote by absentee ballot. A second law, H.B. 25, will allow prospective voters to register through Election Day. Under prior law, the state’s voter registration deadline was the fourth Saturday before Election Day.

Wisconsin’s legislature rejects Wisconsin Election Commission (WEC) efforts to count valid ballots with minor omissions, while voters with disabilities sue to ensure access to voting assistance. Wisconsin mail ballots can be rejected over minor omissions, such as a missing zip code for their ballot's witness. Wisconsin is one of a small number of states that requires voters to fill out their mail ballots in front of a witness, who must then write their signature and address on the certificate envelope. In accordance with guidance issued by the WEC in 2016, election officials may fill in missing witness address information in certain circumstances. In response to a lawsuit seeking to invalidate that policy, the WEC codified that guidance as a rule and filed it with the Legislature’s committee that reviews administrative rules. The committee then rejected the rule.

A recent Wisconsin Supreme Court decision invalidating drop boxes seems to assert that voters – including those with disabilities – cannot be assisted when returning their complated ballot to a municipal clerk. On Friday, voters with disabilities sued to ensure they could exercise their federal rights, which entitle them to assistance in voting, in the upcoming primary and thereafter. Voters have recently won similar litigation in North Carolina.

Florida voters face new hurdles due to ID requirements. As Florida’s August 23rd primary approaches, many voters are receiving a last-minute request from their supervisor of elections to update their registration files with their driver’s license or Social Security number. Voters without this information in their registration files will be unable to vote by mail due to the new ID requirements enacted in last year’s S.B. 90. Roughly 33,000 voters in Duval County alone were informed of the need to update their information. Counties throughout Florida, where nearly 5 million people voted by mail in 2020, are conducting similar outreach to avoid leaving thousands of voters without access to mail-in voting.

Michigan court strikes down legislative practice of approving and amending ballot measures as “thwarting the power of the people.” The Michigan Court of Claims ruled last week that the state legislature may not approve a citizen-initiated ballot measure prior to its submission to voters and then subsequently amend the approved measure during the same legislative session. The court ruled that adopting a ballot measure before it reaches voters and then changing it within the same legislative session “thwart[s] the power of the People to initiate laws and then vote on those same laws — a power expressly reserved to the people in the Michigan Constitution.” The ruling alleviates advocate concerns that the legislature may have used the strategy with one of the election-related ballot measures currently pending approval for the ballot.

California enacts a bill that provides greater transparency into the signature verification process. Governor Gavin Newsom signed A.B. 1619, a new law that requires voters to be informed that the signature they provide during the voter registration process will be used to validate the signature on their mail ballot.


Read More

AI chip
a computer chip with the letter a on top of it
Photo by Igor Omilaev on Unsplash

We Should Regulate AI to Make It Grow Faster

The debate over artificial intelligence has become divided between two powerful ideas: that we need a “moratorium” to slow AI until we can make it safe, and that regulating AI will slow the innovation we need for our economy and national security. Both concerns are legitimate. But “moratorium” and “slowing AI growth” are divisive terms: they reassure those concerned about AI's safety, economic and environmental consequences while alarming those who see AI competition and national security as urgent priorities. We need a different starting point—meaningful regulation that provides the safeguards necessary to protect people, communities and the environment while creating the conditions for AI to continue growing. The experiences of Europe and China challenge the assumption that regulation must slow AI.

China has combined increasingly detailed, technology-specific AI regulation with substantial government support for AI development. Recent studies provide evidence that this approach can promote innovation. One 2026 study of Chinese companies from 2017 through 2023 found that the creation of national AI innovation and development pilot zones significantly increased corporate digital transformation, in part through increased research and development, human capital and reduced transition costs. Another 2026 study, covering Chinese manufacturing companies from 2014 through 2024, found that the same policy significantly promoted the adoption of intelligent technologies.

Keep ReadingShow less
The History of U.S. Prevention Through Deterrence: Effective Border Policy or Humanitarian Risk?

The History of U.S. Prevention Through Deterrence: Effective Border Policy or Humanitarian Risk?

A Brief History of Prevention Through Deterrence

The U.S. Border Patrol agency has evolved greatly over the years, shifting its focus to address changing national security concerns. It was originally established in 1924 to restrict illegal immigration by Chinese and European immigrants before moving to restrict alcohol smuggling during Prohibition. The agency adopted its current focus on illegal immigration from Mexico during the 1970s, when immigration pressures coincided with a severe economic recession in the United States. In 1994, the Border Patrol released a strategy document with the support of the Clinton administration which introduced an approach to immigration known as Prevention Through Deterrence. This tactic aimed to discourage border crossings by funneling immigrants through border entry points with harsh terrain, in contrast with previous policies based on arrest and apprehension post-entry.

Successful Prevention Through Deterrence is measured by fewer encounters and apprehensions at the border, indicating that illegal attempts to enter the country have been prevented and deterred. Barriers to entry are policed by a range of physical infrastructure like fences, vehicle barriers, and other blockades designed to stop illegal foot and vehicle traffic. These measures are supported by camera- and thermal-based surveillance systems as well as measures like deportation and criminal charges which impose legal consequences on migrants. The focus of Prevention Through Deterrence operations themselves is twofold: establishing control of high-traffic border sectors and using security measures to enable the seizure of contraband.

Keep ReadingShow less
A microphone in the foreground and a crowd, blurry in the background.

INC ‘26 gathered independent leaders in D.C. to unveil a seven-candidate slate, a Fulcrum Caucus strategy and new tools for corruption-free governance.

Getty Images, uschools

Independent Movement Unites at INC ’26 to Build National Power

From September 23–25, leaders from across the American independent political movement gathered at the JW Marriott in Washington, D.C., for the fourth Independent National Convention (INC ’26). Produced by United Independents, the event brought together hundreds of participants representing political reform organizations, independent campaigns, alternative parties, civic initiatives and grassroots organizing efforts.

The gathering reflected the breadth of activity outside the traditional two-party system while addressing a persistent challenge: translating America's large independent constituency into greater political representation, institutional capacity, and coordinated action.

Keep ReadingShow less
Meeting, handshake and business people with deal in office for funding approval and success.

Four Reds and four Blues reached unanimous Points of Agreement on immigration, then presented them to Reps. Fitzpatrick and Suozzi. Here’s how it worked.

Jacob Wackerhausen/Getty Images

On Immigration, Common Ground May Be Closer Than We Think

Immigration has become one of the issues pulling Americans apart. Earlier this month, at a constituent conversation in Bristol, Pennsylvania, I watched eight Americans with very different political views offer a glimpse of how it does not have to stay that way.

Four “Reds” and four “Blues” — terms used for participants on the political right and left — sat across from Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) and Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.), the Republican and Democratic co-chairs of the House Problem Solvers Caucus, to present something increasingly unusual in our politics: unanimous Points of Agreement on immigration developed through an earlier Common Ground Workshop.

Keep ReadingShow less