Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

No mail-in primary, N.M. high court rules, but absentee voting encouraged

absentee ballot
nycshooter/Getty Images

New Mexico did not last long at the center of the campaign to make voting by mail the default setting for elections during the coronavirus pandemic.

What had loomed as a protracted partisan battle over the rules for the state's primaries, similar to the one that caused chaos last week in Wisconsin, was settled decisively Tuesday at the state Supreme Court. The justices unanimously rejected a plan to restrict in-person voting while sending mail-back ballots to almost all registered voters.

The pace of Covid-19 infections in New Mexico is on course to peak within two weeks of the June 2 primary, meaning thousands who don't request and receive an absentee ballot in time could be confronted with a tough choice between exercising their civic duty and guarding their health.


A dozen other states across the county have primaries set for that day. The only contests before then are in Oregon, Idaho and Kansas, and all are relying on voting by mail.

In New Mexico, four of the five people on the high court panel that decided the case are Democrats, and after a four-hour hearing and two hours of deliberations they agreed with the Republicans that state law would be violated under the vote-by-mail proposal.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Instead, the court ordered state and local election authorities to distribute absentee ballot applications to all who have registered to vote by the May 5 deadline. That will be about 1 million registered Republicans and Democrats, because primaries in the state are closed to independents.

In theory, four weeks would be plenty of time to request, receive, complete and return such a bar-coded form.

Democratic Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver, the state Democratic Party and 27 of the state's 33 county clerks wanted instead to proactively deliver the ballots and then open 170 polling stations on election day for turning in the votes, completing provisional ballots, and seeking language or disability assistance.

"No one can deny the devastating effect that this virus has had and continues to have on our community," Chief Justice Judith Nakamura said in announcing the court's decision on a videoconference. "However the relief that is requested is specifically prohibited by New Mexico statute ... which says that a mail ballot shall not be delivered by the county clerk to any person other than the applicant for the ballot."

Democrtatic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham said late Tuesday her government would work to minimize the number of people who would be compelled to vote or work at the polls on primary day because such behaviors would pose "a grave threat of heightened transmission of the virus."

With the Democratic presidential contest effectively ended, the turnout will mainly affect close races for nominations to judicial positions, the Legislature and Congress, particularly an expensive and hotly contested campaign for an open and reliably blue House seat centered on Santa Fe.

Nakamura is the only justice who joined the court as a Republican. Two justices running for re-election this fall as Democrats recused themselves and were replaced for the case by lower-court Democrats.

A special session of the Legislature to change the law was not a viable option in light of the statewide stay-at-home order that's very likely to be extended through next month.

Read More

A better direction for democracy reform

Denver election judge Eric Cobb carefully looks over ballots as counting continued on Nov. 6. Voters in Colorado rejected a ranked choice voting and open primaries measure.

Helen H. Richardson/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images

A better direction for democracy reform

Drutman is a senior fellow at New America and author "Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America."

This is the conclusion of a two-part, post-election series addressing the questions of what happened, why, what does it mean and what did we learn? Read part one.

I think there is a better direction for reform than the ranked choice voting and open primary proposals that were defeated on Election Day: combining fusion voting for single-winner elections with party-list proportional representation for multi-winner elections. This straightforward solution addresses the core problems voters care about: lack of choices, gerrymandering, lack of competition, etc., with a single transformative sweep.

Keep ReadingShow less
To-party doom loop
Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America

Let’s make sense of the election results

Drutman is a senior fellow at New America and author of "Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America."

Well, here are some of my takeaways from Election Day, and some other thoughts.

1. The two-party doom loop keeps getting doomier and loopier.

Keep ReadingShow less
Person voting in Denver

A proposal to institute ranked choice voting in Colorado was rejected by voters.

RJ Sangosti/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images

Despite setbacks, ranked choice voting will continue to grow

Mantell is director of communications for FairVote.

More than 3 million people across the nation voted for better elections through ranked choice voting on Election Day, as of current returns. Ranked choice voting is poised to win majority support in all five cities where it was on the ballot, most notably with an overwhelming win in Washington, D.C. – 73 percent to 27 percent.

Keep ReadingShow less
Electoral College map

It's possible Donald Trump and Kamala Harris could each get 269 electoral votes this year.

Electoral College rules are a problem. A worst-case tie may be ahead.

Johnson is the executive director of the Election Reformers Network, a national nonpartisan organization advancing common-sense reforms to protect elections from polarization. Keyssar is a Matthew W. Stirling Jr. professor of history and social policy at the Harvard Kennedy School. His work focuses on voting rights, electoral and political institutions, and the evolution of democracies.

It’s the worst-case presidential election scenario — a 269–269 tie in the Electoral College. In our hyper-competitive political era, such a scenario, though still unlikely, is becoming increasingly plausible, and we need to grapple with its implications.

Recent swing-state polling suggests a slight advantage for Kamala Harris in the Rust Belt, while Donald Trump leads in the Sun Belt. If the final results mirror these trends, Harris wins with 270 electoral votes. But should Trump take the single elector from Nebraska’s 2nd congressional district — won by Joe Biden in 2020 and Trump in 2016 — then both candidates would be deadlocked at 269.

Keep ReadingShow less