Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Felon voting rights bills face long odds at GOP-led statehouses in Georgia, Missouri

People voting
ajijchan/Getty Images

Democrats are making two fresh runs at expanding the voting rights of felons, but they face probably insurmountable odds in the Republican legislatures of both Georgia and Missouri.

In Atlanta and Jefferson City, Democrats are pushing legislation this month that would restore the franchise to people convicted of nonviolent crimes as soon as they're released from prison. But GOP majorities are insisting on sticking with the more restrictive status quo in both places.

Enfranchising the formerly incarcerated, who are disproportionately poor and non-white, has become a top priority of civil rights groups. But critics say a convict's debts to society should not be so easy to pay off. Partisan politics infuses the disagreement, because ex-felons are a reliably Democratic voting bloc.


Georgia and Missouri are among the 21 states where felons may vote again only after finishing probation and parole. Georgia is one of a handful of states that also makes discharged prisoners pay off all fines and court costs associated with their convictions.

Democratic lawmakers have proposed adding both states to the roster of 16 (plus D.C.) where some prisoners may register as soon as their incarceration is over.

In Georgia last year, Republicans on a Senate committee stopped a bill to allow nonviolent ex-felons to vote immediately after serving their sentences. In an attempt to revive that idea, last week Democratic Sen. Harold Jones of Augusta proposed a voting rights bill with a long list of exceptions — covering those convicted of more than 70 offenses involving "moral turpitude."

In Missouri, two Democratic senators from St. Louis have proposed extending the right to vote to nonviolent ex-felons on parole or probation. The lawmakers also want to put the issue on the ballot for voters to decide. But Republican Gov. Mike Parson spoke out against the legislation, saying it was better to leave the state's law as is.


Read More

With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

Should the U.S. nationalize elections? A constitutional analysis of federalism, the Elections Clause, and the risks of centralized control over voting systems.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Why Nationalizing Elections Threatens America’s Federalist Design

The Federalism Question: Why Nationalizing Elections Deserves Skepticism

The renewed push to nationalize American elections, presented as a necessary reform to ensure uniformity and fairness, deserves the same skepticism our founders directed toward concentrated federal power. The proposal, though well-intentioned, misunderstands both the constitutional architecture of our republic and the practical wisdom in decentralized governance.

The Constitutional Framework Matters

The Constitution grants states explicit authority over the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections, with Congress retaining only the power to "make or alter such Regulations." This was not an oversight by the framers; it was intentional design. The Tenth Amendment reinforces this principle: powers not delegated to the federal government remain with the states and the people. Advocates for nationalization often cite the Elections Clause as justification, but constitutional permission is not constitutional wisdom.

Keep ReadingShow less
Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

A voter registration drive in Corpus Christi, Texas, on Oct. 5, 2024. The deadline to register to vote for Texas' March 3 primary election is Feb. 2, 2026. Changes to USPS policies may affect whether a voter registration application is processed on time if it's not postmarked by the deadline.

Gabriel Cárdenas for Votebeat

Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

Texans seeking to register to vote or cast a ballot by mail may not want to wait until the last minute, thanks to new guidance from the U.S. Postal Service.

The USPS last month advised that it may not postmark a piece of mail on the same day that it takes possession of it. Postmarks are applied once mail reaches a processing facility, it said, which may not be the same day it’s dropped in a mailbox, for example.

Keep ReadingShow less
Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
People voting at voting booths.

A little-known interstate compact could change how the U.S. elects presidents by 2028, replacing the Electoral College with the national popular vote.

Getty Images, VIEW press

The Quiet Campaign That Could Rewrite the 2028 Election

Most Americans are unaware, but a quiet campaign in states across the country is moving toward one of the biggest changes in presidential elections since the nation was founded.

A movement called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is happening mostly out of public view and could soon change how the United States picks its president, possibly as early as 2028.

Keep ReadingShow less