Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Citing virus, senior senator proposes $500 million for voting at home

Sen. Ron Wyden

Fearing the coronavirus may drive down turnout, Sen. Ron Wyden proposed giving states money to cover the costs of voting by mail.

Samuel Corum/Getty Images

With the coronavirus now officially labeled a pandemic by the World Health Organization, concerns about its impact on the election keep growing.

Candidates are canceling rallies. Sunday's Democratic presidential debate in Phoenix won't have a live audience. And election officials are worried the disease's unpredictable spread will dampen turnout in the remaining primaries and in November.

An influential senior senator is proposing a remedy for that last concern: Make it easy for voters to cast their ballots from home.


Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon plans to introduce legislation Wednesday that would establish a $500 million federal fund for creating vote-by-mail systems in times of national crisis. The bill would also give all Americans the right to vote from home this year if more than a dozen states declared a coronavirus emergency.

At least for now, the bill will be a decided long shot in the gridlocked Senate, where the Republican majority has opposed all proposals for giving Washington more influence over how states and counties conduct elections.

Voting by mail has become increasingly popular. In the 2018 midterm, more than 31 million ballots were cast this way, a quarter of the total. All states offer voters with excuses related to travel, age or disability the option to mail in their votes. But over the past two decades, many states have expanded use of the practice.

Twenty years ago, Wyden's home state of Oregon became the first to adopt vote-by-mail for all elections. Colorado, Utah, Washington and (for the first time this year) Hawaii are also entirely vote-by-mail states; voters automatically receive a ballot that they can return by mail, in a secure dropbox or at a polling station. Sixteen other states have provisions that allow certain elections to use mail-in voting.

Mailing in ballots would not only protect voters from public health crises, but would also prevent poll workers — who tend to be elderly and therefore more at risk — from getting sick.

Long lines, which thousands have faced already in recent primaries, would also no longer be a problem with widely implemented vote-at-home measures.

That's what voting by mail is all about, according to Amber McReynolds of the National Vote at Home Institute, which advocates for widespread use of vote-by-mail systems. "It's delivering democracy through an existing infrastructure: the U.S. Postal Service," she said Wednesday.

An added bonus is that most Americans consider the Postal Service to be the most trustworthy brand in the country, according to a January survey by Morning Consult.

McReynolds said Wyden's plan captures many of the best practices her organization has recommended, including paying for postage and secure drop boxes.

No such measure has been introduced in the Democratic House, where its prospects would be better. But if the idea gains unexpected traction because of COVID-19, the bill could be enacted in time for November.

"I hope this bill garners bipartisan support because it's something that serves the entire electorate," McReynolds said. "And hopefully it will relieve some of the burden placed on people by the coronavirus."


Read More

People at voting booths.

A clear breakdown of voter ID laws under the Constitution, federal statutes, and court rulings—plus analysis of new Trump administration proposals to impose nationwide voter identification requirements.

Getty Images, LPETTET

Just the Facts: Voter ID, States’ Powers, and Federal Limits

The Fulcrum approaches news stories with an open mind and skepticism, presenting our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.


Few issues generate more heat and are less understood than voter ID.

Keep ReadingShow less
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
With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

An analysis of Trump’s SAVE Act strategy, the voter ID debate, and how Pew data is being misused—exploring election integrity, voter suppression, and the political fight shaping U.S. democracy.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Stop Fighting Voter ID. Start Defining It.

President Trump doesn't need the SAVE America Act to pass. He only needs the debate to continue. Every minute spent arguing about voter suppression repeats the underlying premise — that noncitizen voting is a real and widespread problem — until it feels like an established fact. The question is whether Democrats will contest Republicans’ definition before the frame hardens.

Trump's claim that 88% of Americans support the bill traces to a Pew Research Center survey — a survey that found 83% support a “government-issued photo ID to vote,” not extreme vetting for proof of citizenship. That support included 95% of Republicans and 71% of Democrats, indicating genuine, broad, bipartisan support for a basic civic principle. That's worth taking seriously.

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