Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Kentucky lawmakers make rare bipartisan push for voting expansions

Kentucky statehouse

Having passed the state House, it now moves across the Capitol to the Senat.

traveler1116/Getty Images

While many GOP lawmakers across the country are pushing for voting restrictions, Republicans in Kentucky are taking a different approach.

Last week, the state House passed with near unanimous support a bill to allow for early voting on the Thursday, Friday and Saturday before Election Day. Although this period is much shorter than the three weeks of early voting allowed during last year's pandemic-era election, making early voting a permanent fixture in Kentucky is still a significant expansion.

Following the 2020 election, in which most states adapted their voting rules and procedures in response to the Covid-19 pandemic, legislators are now considering whether to make these voting expansions permanent or to roll back access to the ballot box. Republicans are generally in favor of more restrictive measures because they erroneously claim their proposals will protect against mail voting fraud, but opponents see such moves as efforts to suppress left-leaning voters.


The legislation now goes to the Senate, which had proposed its own version of the bill. Since the election changes received such broad, bipartisan support in the state House, it is likely to also pass through the Senate and head to Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear's desk once the differences have been resolved.

In addition to the early voting change, the House bill would also establish centers where any voter in the county may cast a ballot regardless of precinct. Each county would also be required to provide at least one secure drop box for absentee ballots.

If the bill is enacted, election officials will need to notify voters of any signature matching issues with their ballot and to give them the opportunity to fix it. This ballot "curing" process has not previously been available to voters in Kentucky.

However, the bill would not expand absentee voting eligibility. Currently, only Kentuckians with certain excuses (such as age, illness, disability or temporary residence outside of the state) can vote absentee. Voting by mail was temporarily expanded to all eligible voters last year due to Covid-19.

The online portal that was created last year for requesting absentee ballots will remain in use, though.

The bill also includes provisions more typical of Republican efforts. So-called "ballot harvesting" by third-party entities would be prohibited, allowing only for family members, housemates or caregivers to return ballots for voters who cannot do so themselves. The state would also be required to remove from the voter rolls anyone who registers in another state.


Read More

Members of a women's softball team cheerfully join hands during practice on a sunny day, showcasing team spirit, cooperation, and enthusiasm for the sport.

Do trans women have a strength advantage? A look at studies on hormone therapy, muscle mass, and why it should determine eligibility in women's sports.

luza studios/Getty Images

Trans Females Are Not Biological Males - Let Them Play on Female Teams

Most Americans, Democrats as well as Republicans—many following the lead of President Trump—feel that it is not right for trans females to participate in women's sports. But the trans community, supported by those on the left wing of the Democratic Party, insists that this is part of ensuring the rights of trans people. The issue has been divisive among Democrats.

This is a complex issue. On the one hand, boys are boys, and girls are girls. That's the basic fact behind male and female sports, other than some intramural school sports that have boys and girls on the same team. Because boys are biologically stronger and faster than girls, separate leagues have been developed for both. This has nothing to do with gender identity; it is just a reflection of biological fact.

Keep ReadingShow less
An aerial view of a Flock camera

An aerial view of a Flock camera in Burbank, California. U.S. President Donald Trump expressed support for Flock cameras, saying he likes the AI-powered surveillance technology because of its use by law enforcement, despite concerns that it infringes on privacy.

(Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

Flock Cameras Are Coming Down – but We Need More To Dismantle the Surveillance State

Chances are, you’ve seen one in your neighborhood. Flock cameras have become a major flashpoint for voters in the leadup to the midterms. The concept sounds straight out of 1984 — a network of government-owned cameras that track your movements — it’s no wonder that Americans across party lines are demanding their states and towns sever ties with the controversial company. Surveillance fears are only getting stronger as we enter the AI era.

But the problem isn’t just Flock. These cameras, Automated License Plate Readers or ALPRs to be exact, are a symptom of a larger “surveil first, ask questions later” attitude that has been adopted by local and federal government for decades. In recent years, the federal government has been dramatically expanding the nation’s surveillance infrastructure. This has taken many forms, from facial recognition technology at the airport, to law enforcement monitoring your mail, to the government watching what you’re posting on your personal social media pages. Since April, many Democrats and Republicans in Congress have united to stop what would effectively be a blank check for surveillance via FISA reauthorization, demanding surveillance reforms such as closing the “data broker loophole”, which allows the government to buy Americans’ personal data without a warrant.

Keep ReadingShow less