Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Stimulus standoff stalls funding to make voting easier

How much to spend making elections safe this year, and whether to set new federal requirements for easing the voting process, were among many unresolved questions Monday as congressional leaders and the Trump administration struggled to agree on a nearly $2 trillion plan to rescue the economy from the coronavirus crisis.

The package Senate Republicans tried unsuccessfully to advance over the weekend included just $140 million to help states and local election officials "prepare for and respond to" the virus — but with no ground rules for spending the grants. Senate Democrats are holding out for an order of magnitude more, about $1.5 billion, while momentum was building in the Democratic-majority House for spending $4 billion rushing a universal vote-by-mail system into place in the next seven months.

The standoff, and the amounts of money involved, are second-tier issues in the context of the most significant federal economic bailout bill in modern times. But for advocates of boosting civic engagement and easing the bitter battles over voting rights, negotiations on the package offer a rare and enormously important opportunity to achieve goals set long before the pandemic.


Democrats and good governance groups hope to capitalize on the moment to secure a significant expansion of voting from home in November. They say that, by allowing tens of millions more to make their presidential choice remotely in November, they will do more than reassure the public that conducting the 2020 election can be done safely and securely: Once voting by mail becomes an option for most Americans — only a quarter of votes were cast that way in 2016 — it will quickly become the national norm.

But unless Congress insists on the switch, they say, turnout will plummet in many parts of the country — sowing doubt about whether the national will is reflected in the result and dwarfing anxieties about the effects of foreign hacking and disinformation.

Those arguments have, so far, been met with almost unanimous resistance from Republicans, led by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who are willing to give states and localities federal aid for modernizing elections but oppose almost any new federal mandates on what those improvements should be.

It is also clear that GOP candidates generally believe they do best in low-turnout elections, while Democrats are confident they do best when more people are able to vote.

"I think we're going to end up being OK on the money, but we're going to have to keep fighting him on the details," Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, the former presidential candidate now leading the vote-by-mail effort for the Senate Democrats, said of McConnell on Monday. (She spoke to reporters after announcing her husband, John, had been hospitalized because of limited breathing capacity after testing positive for Covid-19.)

"We have a new case to make to Republicans now," said her partner in that effort, Ron Wyden of Oregon, who's been pushing to expand absentee voting since he won the nation's first all-mail Senate election 24 years ago. "In a worst case scenario, it's going to be a choice between voting by mail or not voting at all. That's not even a close call."

While the massive package was still stalled in the Senate for lack of a bipartisan breakthrough, the Democrats in charge of the House were pressing ahead in crafting a response to whatever senators end up advancing. To that end, 55 of them over the weekend signed on to making an immediate vote-at-home mandate part of the package.

"We may be forced to decide that an all vote by mail election is our only choice if we hope to keep people safe and protect the continuity of our democratic elections," one of them, New Jersey's Tom Malinoswski, tweeted. "The most important thing we can do is enable states to prepare ahead of time."

The cost for all states to print, mail and count postage-paid and barcoded ballots for the entire country in November, and pay the people to run the effort, would fall between $982 million and $1.4 billion, according to a Brennan Center for Justice analysis released last week. The progressive think tank said another $600 million would be needed to expand in-person early voting and online registration efforts to minimize in-person contact with the voting system.

The group has organized a bipartisan group of 19 state and local election officials, many from reliably red states, to lobby Congress for a generous grant package but without getting behind any of the nationwide mandates.

One of their fears, they signaled, is that without ample additional aid for people and equipment, a surge in absentee voting even without a mandate could overwhelm their systems in November and make impossible a vote count that's both reliable and speedy.

Every state offers some sort of absentee or vote-by mail option, but the rules vary greatly — from an excuse required on absentee ballot applications that must be resubmitted before every election in nine states, to the five states where mail-in ballots are delivered to every voter before every contest — which is what the Klobuchar-Wyden bill envisions. The senators say that, without a federal mandate, 16 states would have to change their laws to make this a reality by November.

Packing even more into the Wyden-Klobuchar bill

Among other provisions, their legislation would:

    • Require states to permit at least 20 days of early in-person voting and no-excuse absentee voting-by-mail and to start counting those ballots two weeks before Election Day.
    • Make states provide self-sealing envelopes with prepaid postage to go with all absentee ballots, applications for those ballots and registration applications.
    • Make downloadable and printable absentee ballots available to anyone who did not receive one by mail.
    • Bar states from setting registration deadlines more than three weeks ahead of Election Day.
    • Mandate that absentee ballots be valid if postmarked before polls close on Election Day and received within 10 days.
    • Require states to track (and allow voters to track) their mail ballots by putting barcodes on the envelopes.
    • Compel states to create procedures for voters to appeal when their ballot signatures don't match signatures on file.
    • Subsidize the cost of hiring and training a new generation of poll workers, now that three of every five in the country are older than 60.

    Read More

    Diverse People At Voting Booth. Vote Here Elections Sign

    A political scientist examines how automatic voter registration is quietly turning non-affiliation into America's largest voting bloc.

    AndreyPopov/Getty Images

    When Neither Party Is the Default: Rethinking Representation As America’s Electorate Changes

    For most of my career as a political scientist, representation was the central theme of my teaching and research. Early on, I studied how legislators understood their responsibilities to constituents — whether they saw themselves as delegates carrying out constituent mandates, trustees exercising independent judgment, or politicos combining both. That work asked a question that still matters: What does it mean to represent the public in a changing democracy?

    Today I find myself asking a related question: What happens when the electorate changes but the institutions built to represent it do not?

    Keep ReadingShow less
    A person looks out at the North Tower pool at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum ahead of the 25th anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

    A person looks out at the North Tower pool at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum ahead of the 25th anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

    Gary Hershorn/Getty Images

    How 9/11’s Memory Continues to Shape American Citizenship

    Twenty‑five years after September 11th, the burden of that day continues to affect us in ways that are difficult to express. It was a moment of profound loss, but also one that revealed both the vulnerability and resilience of our national fabric. The memories remain vivid for many of us: where we were, what we felt, and how the world appeared to change in an instant. Even now, a quarter century later, the impact of that morning continues to shape how we understand our country, our responsibilities, and our relationships with one another.

    To help us all reflect on that day, I invited four contributors to the Fulcrum to share reflections not to revisit the tragedy, but to commemorate the ways it has persisted in our consciousness twenty-five years later.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    Close-up shot of a Black woman's hands receiving a mail-in ballot to vote in a USA Presidential, Senatorial, Congressional, or local election

    An immigrant's perspective on why America's election debate over security vs. access is a false choice — and how USPS mail ballot rules fit in.

    Jeremy Poland/Getty Images

    Ballot Security and Voter Access Are Not Opposites: What the USPS Ballot Rule Gets Right

    I came to the United States from India in 1982. In Indian elections, I watched officials check voter identity and mark a voter’s finger with indelible ink. Party representatives observed the process. The system was imperfect, as every large democracy is, but it sent a simple message: casting one vote is a serious civic act, and the process should make that clear.

    When I later became an American citizen and cast my first ballot, the experience felt very different. A poll worker found my name on a list and handed me a ballot. In my precinct, there was no photo identification check. I was surprised—not because I expected voting to be difficult, but because I expected a system as consequential as an election to have clear, visible safeguards.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    A group of people wait in line to get their ballots to vote in the election.

    Uncontested elections are more common than you'd think. From open primaries to multi-member districts, here's what states like California and Alaska are doing to bring real competition back to the ballot — and what it'll take to change political culture, too.

    Getty Images, SDI Productions

    What America Can Do About Its Uncontested Elections

    Politics nerds have many ideas about how to strengthen American democracy; however, few directly address silent elections. For example, ranked-choice voting does nothing to encourage more candidates to run if there are not enough. Term limits increase turnover, but even newcomers can frequently run uncontested in general elections if they have won competitive primaries.

    Fortunately, the cause isn’t hopeless. For one, tightening campaign finance laws would put potential challengers on more even footing with corporate-backed politicians, encouraging more candidates to run. Independent redistricting would also help. The Cook Political Report, a poll aggregator, considers only 69 of America’s 435 House districts competitive. Fair redistricting means more competitive districts and therefore more contested elections.

    Keep ReadingShow less