Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Republicans close to ending same-day registration in Montana

Montana Capitol

Lawmakers in Montana's Capitol are expected to work out differences in their voter registration bills and send a final version to the governor.

Dennis Macdonald/Getty Images

Republican lawmakers need only clear a couple minor hurdles in their effort to eliminate same-day voter registration in Montana.

On Tuesday, the GOP-majority state Senate voted 32-18 along party lines to endorse a bill that would end voter registration at noon the day before Election Day. Their endorsement all but guarantees the legislation will soon reach Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte's desk.

Montana is currently one of 21 states, plus Washington, D.C., that allow voters to both register and cast a ballot on Election Day. Since Montana adopted the policy in 2006, thousands have taken advantage of this last-minute registration option. Same-day registration would be nationally mandated with enactment of HR 1, the comprehensive voting rights and democracy reform bill Democrats are pushing against solid Republican resistance in Congress.


Republicans in Helena who support the bill say Montanans already have plenty of time to register to vote before an election and the same-day policy places an undue burden on election administrators.

"Elections, you know, they don't just pop up out of the blue. They don't come along and surprise us. We know they're coming. The dates are there. We need to register ahead of time," said GOP state Sen. Mike Cuffe, who sponsored the bill.

But Democrats who oppose this effort called the legislation "voter suppression." They argue limiting registration opportunities will make it harder for people, particularly Native Americans and those with disabilities, to participate in elections.

Last month, the state House passed the bill along party lines. The state Senate will vote on the legislation one more time and then both chambers will need to concur on the amendments. Once it clears the Legislature, the measure will be sent to the governor for final approval.


Read More

The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's annual policy conference at the Washington Convention Center March 6, 2018 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

After AIPAC failed to defeat El-Sayed in the Michigan Democratic Senate primary—after spending $32 million—it said that it remains committed to defeating El-Sayed and his "radical, anti-Israel" agenda in the general election. Which means it is poised to sink tens of millions of dollars in supporting Republican Mike Rogers. It also said that Haley Stevens, his opponent, had presented "an authentic Democratic agenda." Meaning that El-Sayed did not? And they think that Mike Rogers, a MAGA Trump supporter, does compared with El-Sayed?

How can AIPAC say that El-Sayed does not present an authentic Democratic agenda when his socialist stance is much more in line with the principles stated in the Declaration of Independence than most centrist Democrats'? And making it sound like AIPAC cares about an authentic Democratic agenda is deceitful, when in the same breath they make clear that they will support Mike Rogers, a Trump lackey, in the general election.

Keep ReadingShow less
Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research
silhouette of person using microscope

Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research

Scientists and the federal government have been close partners since World War II. A landmark report by President Truman’s chief science advisor laid out a vision for government research that shaped eight decades of federally funded science. That vision is now at risk. In principle, the Trump administration has supported scientific research with its own vision for a new “golden age of science.” But in practice, the administration has upended the relationship between the government, researchers, and their institutions. The changes have alarmed working scientists and their allies, who have protested in record numbers.

In July, I moderated a webinar on “Rewriting the Rules: What’s happening to public science?” (read the transcript here). The webinar was co-sponsored by NAPA, CODE, and the Bridge Alliance, with Dr. Aaron Carroll of AcademyHealth, Dr. Chris Marcum of the Federation of American Scientists, Dr. Gretchen Goldman of the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Dr. Maryam Zaringhalam of the Center for Open Science. I also interviewed Cole Donovan of the Stand Up for Science Foundation by email.

Keep ReadingShow less
Why hasn’t the Princeton Redistricting Project spoken out?

The exterior of Capitol Hill

Getty Images

Why hasn’t the Princeton Redistricting Project spoken out?

The 2026 congressional map is finally set after ten states adopted new congressional redistricting maps for the November 3 General Election. Observers note that the Princeton Gerrymandering Project (PGP) has not graded any state’s maps since it gave California’s Proposition 50 an “F” on October 30, 2025.

The PGP has officially paused grading its Redistricting Report Card because founder Dr. Sam Wang, who transitioned from the Gerrymandering Project to the Electoral Innovation Lab, has launched a campaign for Congress in New Jersey’s 12th District, requiring him to step back from his academic roles, including his leadership at PGP.

Keep ReadingShow less
Impunity: Democracy and the Toll of Unchecked Harm

Lady Justice

Photo provided

Impunity: Democracy and the Toll of Unchecked Harm

Impunity is not only the failure to punish. It is a public answer to the question of whether harm matters.

Every democracy must repeatedly answer the question of impunity. When public trust is violated, or when law itself is manipulated or attacked, penalties matter. But the deeper question is whether a society can recognize injury and prevent further harm when it has lost the ability to clearly name wrongdoing.

Keep ReadingShow less