Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Politicians, philanthropists latest working to assure public that election is fair

Detroiit voters

VoteSafe is running ad campaigns in Michigan (and other states) to convince conservative and independent voters that the election is safe and secure.

Brittany Greeson/Getty Images

In the latest in a string of such efforts, a group of prominent political leaders and one of leading philanthropists are trying to spread the word that this election is safe and secure — and will be accurate.

The organizers of these and other campaigns are facing a much more skeptical and worried electorate than usual — thanks to the coronavirus pandemic and President Trump's steady drumbeat of assertions without evidence that record mail-in voting is riven with fraud.


The first group, VoteSafe, is led by Republican Tom Ridge, a former governor of Pennsylvania and Homeland Security secretary, and Democrat Jennifer Granholm, a former governor of Michigan.

VoteSafe has unveiled a $1.7 million advertising campaign featuring local election officials reassuring voters that the election is safe and secure. The "guardians of democracy" campaign is beginning in four battleground states: Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

The digital ads are targeting independent voters in the four states. In Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, ads targeting conservatives are appearing on Fox News.

In the Michigan ad, Walker City Clerk Sarah Bydalek says, "Absentee voting in Michigan is nothing new. I can assure you our system is safe and secure. We have a strict verification and ID process once your ballot arrives."

"Whether you vote in person or by mail, have faith, your vote will be counted," Bydalek says.

Meanwhile, about 115 philanthropic leaders have signed a letter calling for safe elections in which all votes are counted and the results accepted peacefully.

The letter, reported this week by the Chronicle of Philanthropy, cites the highly partisan and inflammatory rhetoric surrounding the election.

Among those signing the letter are Reid Hoffman, co-founder of LinkedIn; Nicole Taylor, president of the Silicon Valley Community Foundation; Rachel Hoff, policy director of the Ronald Reagan Institute; and Larry Kramer, head of the Hewlett Foundation.

"These are giant warning signs for American democracy, for civil society, and for most of the issues about which philanthropy is concerned," the letter states.

It urges leaders of all types and ordinary Americans to make sure "the sacred right to vote is upheld."


Read More

Fueling the Future: The Debate Over California’s Gas Tax and Transportation Funding
person in red shirt wearing silver bracelet holding red and black metal tool
Photo by Wassim Chouak on Unsplash

Fueling the Future: The Debate Over California’s Gas Tax and Transportation Funding

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

Keep ReadingShow less
A person looking at social media app icons on a phone

Gen Z is quietly leaving social media as algorithmic feeds, infinite scroll, and addictive platform design fuel anxiety, isolation, and mental health struggles.

Matt Cardy/Getty Images

Gen Z Begs Legislators: Make Social Media Social Again

Lately, it seems like each time I reach out to an old acquaintance through social media, I’m met with a page that reads, “This account doesn’t exist anymore.”

Many Gen-Z’ers are quietly quitting the platforms we grew up on.

Keep ReadingShow less
Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional
beige concrete building under blue sky during daytime

Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional

The Supreme Court, in holding that partisan gerrymandering is permissible—unless it "goes too far"—stated that the argument made against this practice based on the Court's "one person, one vote" doctrine didn't work because the cases that developed that doctrine were about ensuring that each vote had an equal weight. The Court reasoned that after redistricting, each vote still has equal weight.

I would respectfully disagree. After admittedly partisan redistricting, each vote does not have an equal weight. The purpose of partisan gerrymandering is typically to create a "safe" seat—to group citizens so that the dominant political party has a clear majority of the voters. It's the transformation of a contested seat or even a seat safe for the other party into a safe seat for the party doing the redistricting.

Keep ReadingShow less