Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Arkansas Republicans push through new voting restrictions

Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson

With the Legislature's approval, the two restrictive voting bills now head to Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson's desk.

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Arkansas is positioned to become the next state to tighten rules around voting and election procedures.

This week, the Republican-majority Legislature approved two measures that would implement new restrictions on absentee voting and activities near polling places. Both bills now head to GOP Gov. Asa Hutchinson, who is expected to sign them.

This continues a nationwide trend of Republican lawmakers pushing hundreds of restrictive voting bills in response to false claims of fraud in the 2020 elections. At the same time, Democratic legislators have been advocating for easing access to the ballot box.


One of the bills recently approved by the Arkansas Legislature would amend the absentee ballot process in the state. County clerks and other designated election officials would be barred from sending absentee ballot applications to voters who had not requested them. But election officials could display a mail voting application form online.

Arkansas is one of 15 states that currently requires an excuse to vote by mail.

The bill would also deny an absentee ballot to any voter if their signature on the application does not match the signature on the voter registration form. Another provision of the bill would make the possession of more than four absentee ballots by one person "a rebuttable presumption of intent to defraud." Democrats argue the practice of collecting ballots helps the elderly and those who live far from mail service or ballot boxes.

Democrats pushed back against the signature matching rule, raising concerns that it would disproportionately impact elderly and disabled voters. But Republicans maintained it would prevent voter fraud — of which there was scant evidence in last year's election.

On Tuesday, the state Senate voted 27-8, along party lines, to approve this legislation, which was passed by the state House earlier this month.

The other bill would prevent someone from being within 100 feet of the entrance to a polling site while voting is taking place, unless they are entering or leaving the building "for lawful purposes." Arkansas's current laws already ban electioneering and other political activity outside polling places.

Proponents of the bill said it is intended to stop groups from handing out water, food or other items to voters in line outside polling places. A similar prohibition recently passed in Georgia has been decried by voting rights advocates.

Before the Arkansas House voted 74-23, also on Tuesday, to send this bill to the governor, Republican lawmakers defended the legislation by saying it would protect voters and prevent people from congregating outside polling locations.

But Democrats argued it went beyond addressing electioneering and could deter voters from coming to the polls.

"I want you to think very carefully about what our state looks like when we pass legislation that creates barriers, however small, to keep people from the polls in whatever way," said Democratic state Rep. Vivian Flowers.


Read More

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Crowd of people walking on a street.

Andy Andrews//Getty Images

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Biologist and author Paul Ehrlich, the most influential Chicken Little of the last century, died at the age of 93 this week. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” launched decades of institutional panic in government, entertainment and journalism.

Ehrlich’s core neo-Malthusian argument was that overpopulation would exhaust the supply of food and natural resources, leading to a cascade of catastrophes around the world. “The Population Bomb” opens with a bold prediction, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

People clear rubble in a house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026 in Tehran, Iran. The United States and Israel continued their joint attack on Iran that began on February 28. Iran retaliated by firing waves of missiles and drones at Israel, and targeting U.S. allies in the region.

Getty Images, Majid Saeedi

Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

Most of what we have heard from the administration as it pertains to the Iran War is swagger and bro-talk. A few days into the war, the White House released a social media video that combined footage of the bombardment with clips from video games. Not long after, it released a second video, titled “Justice the American Way,” that mixed images of the U.S. military with scenes from movies like Gladiator and Top Gun Maverick.

Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, War Secretary Pete Hegseth boasted of “death and destruction from the sky all day long.” “They are toast, and they know it,” he said. “This was never meant to be a fair fight... we are punching them while they’re down.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A student in uniform walking through a campus.

A Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadet walks through campus November 7, 2003 in Princeton, New Jersey.

Getty Images, Spencer Platt

Hegseth is Dumbing Down the Military (on Purpose)

One day before the United States began an ill-defined and illegal war of indefinite length with Iran, Pete Hegseth angrily attacked a different enemy: the Ivy League. The Secretary of War denounced Ivy League universities as "woke breeding grounds of toxic indoctrination” and then eliminated long-standing college fellowship programs with more than a dozen elite colleges, which had historically served as a pipeline for service members to the upper ranks of military leadership. Of the schools now on Hegseth’s "no-fly list," four sit in the top ten of the World’s Top Universities for 2026. So, why does the Secretary of War not want his armed forces to have the best education available? Because he wants a military without a brain.

For a guy obsessed with being the strongest and most lethal force in the world, cutting access to world-class schools is a bizarre gambit. It does reveal Hegseth doesn’t consider intelligence a factor–let alone an asset–in strength or lethality. That tracks. Hegseth alleges the Ivies infect officers with “globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks…” God forbid the tip of the sword of our foreign policy has knowledge of international cooperation and global interconnectedness. The Ivy League has its own issues, but the Pentagon’s claim that they "fail to deliver rigorous education grounded in realism” is almost laughable. I’m a veteran Lieutenant Commander with two Ivy League degrees, both paid for with military tuition assistance, and I promise: it was rigorous. Meanwhile, are Hegseth’s performative politics grounded in reality? Attacking Harvard on social media the eve of initiating a new war with a foreign adversary is disgraceful, and even delusional.

Keep ReadingShow less
Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?
Person working at a desk with a laptop and books.

Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?

Draft an important email without using AI. Write it from scratch — no suggestions, no autocomplete, and no prompt to ChatGPT to compose or revise the email.

Now ask yourself: Did it feel slower? Harder? Slightly uncomfortable?

Keep ReadingShow less