Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Voting rights groups watch warily as Kentucky votes pretty easily

Kentucky voters

The Exposition Center was the only polling place in Louisville on Tuesday.

Brett Carlsen/Getty Images

Kentucky was poised to join the roster of states with calamitous primaries after deciding to shutter 95 percent of its in-person polling locations Tuesday. With only four hours until the polls close, though, there is little visible downside to that aggressive response to favor mail-in-voting because of the coronavirus pandemic.

Kentuckians who didn't receive absentee ballots in time or otherwise decided to vote in person braced for long lines and confusion at the fewer than 200 available locations. But even in the state's biggest population centers — Louisville and Lexington, each of which opened just one place to vote — waiting times were reported as manageable.

And there were minimal complaints about stressed equipment or overwhelmed poll workers, the other problems that sullied Georgia's primary two weeks ago and raised nationwide alarm bells about pandemonium in November.


Even with the reduced options for in-person voting options, Kentucky was on track to see the highest rate of primary turnout in a dozen years, mainly because the state encouraged everyone to vote by mail and the Democratic ballot featured an intense and late-developing contest for the right to challenge Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in the fall.

While long lines didn't seem to be materializing, voting rights groups asserted it was still less than ideal to have only one in-person location in most counties.

They had denounced the arrangements as an act of voter suppression, but their lawsuit hoping to make them open more sites was dismissed last week, a federal judge saying it was too close to the election to change the plans.

The venues in the big cities — a convention center in Louisville and the University of Kentucky's football stadium in Lexington — were large enough to permit poll workers to space out voting booths to adhere with social distancing protocols and cut down wait times.

Still, the arrangement may have made the ballot box inaccessible for some voters — especially those without access to transportation, in the view of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, which has run election trouble hotline on each primary day this year. In a briefing for reporters Tuesday afternoon, the group's president did concede, however, that a free shuttle bus service was available in Louisville and the ride-sharing company Lyft offered free rides to the polls in both cities.

"Preparedness across the board is key," said President Kristen Clarke. "Getting vote-by-mail right is critical and will alleviate some of the burden on poll workers on election day."

In response to critiques of how the election was handled, Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear and Republican Secretary of State Michael Adams pointed to their bipartisan support of mail-in voting — most importantly, their agreement to suspend for the primary the state's usual strict excuse requirements for voting absentee.

As of Monday, more than half of the nearly 1 million Kentuckians who opted to vote absentee had already returned their ballots, representing 27 percent of registered voters. In a typical primary, only about 51,000 voters, less than 2 percent, cast their ballots by mail.

The Southern Poverty Law Center said it was not mollified by the absence of a catastrophe. "The trend of consolidating and closing polling locations, especially in areas where communities of color are concentrated, increased after the disastrous Supreme Court decision" that eliminated the heart of the Voting Right Act seven years ago and "has accelerated to new levels during the Covid-19 pandemic. That's unacceptable and a recipe for potential Election Day disaster."

The main draw was the contest between moderate Amy McGrath, a former Marine fighter pilot, and progressive Charles Booker, a state legislator representing a Black-majority district in Louisville, to contest the re-election of the longest-serving Republican leader in Senate history.

The day also featured another mostly by-mail primary in New York — like the one in Kentucky, delayed from the spring because of the pandemic — a few congressional contests in Virginia and runoffs in Mississippi, North Carolina and South Carolina.

More than 1.7 million absentee ballots were requested in New York — a tenfold increase after the state also dropped its usually strict rules for mail voting because of the pandemic. The Lawyers' Committee hotline reported scattered complaints of poorly trained poll workers and subway-delayed polling place opening in New York City.


Read More

A person signing a piece of paper with other people around them.

Javon Jackson, center, was able to register to vote following passage of a 2019 Nevada law that restored voting rights to formerly incarcerated individuals.

The Nation Is Missing Millions of Voters Due to Lack of Rights for Former Felons

If you gathered every American with a prison record into one contiguous territory and admitted it to the union, you would create the 12th-largest state. It would be home to at least 7 million to 8 million people and hold a dozen votes in the Electoral College.

In a close presidential race, this hypothetical state of the formerly incarcerated could decide who wins the White House.

Keep ReadingShow less
People standing at voting booths.

The proposed SAVE Act and MEGA Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, risking the disenfranchisement of millions of eligible Americans.

Getty Images, EvgeniyShkolenko

The SAVE Act is a Solution in Search of A Problem

The federal government seems to be barreling toward a federal election power grab. Trump's State of the Union address called for the Senate to push through the SAVE Act, which has already passed the House, in the name of so-called "election integrity." And the SAVE Act isn’t the only such bill. Like the SAVE Act, the Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act—introduced in the House—would require voters to provide a document outlined in the Act that allegedly proves their U.S. citizenship. We’ve been down this road before in Texas, and spoiler alert: it was unworkable.

Both the SAVE and MEGA Acts would disenfranchise millions of eligible U.S. citizens without making our federal elections more secure. They seek to roll out a faulty federal voter registration system, despite the existing separate registration and voting process for state and local elections. And these Acts target a minuscule “problem”—but would unleash mass voter purges and confusion.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stickers with the words "I Voted Today."

Virginia is on its way to be the 19th jurisdiction to adopt the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, bringing the U.S. closer to electing presidents by the national popular vote.

Getty Images, EyeWolf

Virginia On The Path to Join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

NPVIC is an agreement among U.S. states and the District of Columbia to award all their electoral votes to the presidential ticket that wins the overall popular vote in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. It is considered a pragmatic, voluntary state-based initiative because it aims to ensure the winner of the national popular vote wins the presidency without requiring a constitutional amendment, operating instead within the existing Electoral College framework by utilizing states' constitutional authority to appoint electors. If enough states join the NPVIC to reach a total of 270 electoral votes, the United States will effectively shift from a winner-take-all (WTA) regime to a national popular vote system for electing the President.

With Virginia's adoption, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact will be adopted by eighteen states and the District of Columbia, collectively holding 222 electoral votes. The compact requires 270 electoral votes (a majority of the 538 total) to take effect. It currently needs forty-eight more electoral votes to become active.

Keep ReadingShow less
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