The newspaper asserts that Ranked Choice Voting "cratered" voter engagement. That's bullshit. by Wm. Steven Humphrey

Starting in January 2025, Portland will have the most diverse, and politically balanced City Council in the history of our city. Full stop.

The reason why we’re able to celebrate this indisputable fact is thanks to charter reform and ranked choice voting, which allowed citizens from every demographic and Portland neighborhood the opportunity to serve their city (and the rest of us to vote for them). 

But despite those two objectively correct statements, local media continues to platform the dishonest cynics who have been fighting charter reform and ranked choice voting from the beginning. The Oregonian, who loves writing intellectually dishonest headlines like this, really outdid themselves with this recent post-election article: Portland’s ranked-choice debut causes voter engagement to crater; 1 in 5 who cast ballots chose no one for City Council. 

Let’s break it down, shall we? Using the word “crater” to describe Portland’s voter engagement, and attempting to lay the blame on the doorstep of ranked choice voting, is not only an unethical choice, it’s factually incorrect. While overall voter turnout wasn’t what it was in 2020 (79%), Portland engagement still reached 74.5%—that’s still three-quarters of our total population. Does that sound like overall engagement “cratered” to you?

 And perhaps it’s true that one-out-of-five voters chose not to rank any candidates for City Council and mayor—though, as a reasonable person, I might wait until that number got a little bit higher before labeling it as “cratering.” And yes, it is absolutely correct that a historically large group of candidates ran for City Council this year, which probably stunned some voters who aren’t used to doing a lot of research. BUT! And let me say this loud and proud so everyone in the back can hear it: Having a lot of candidates who love their community and want to serve it is A VERY GOOD THING. (And it’s even better for democracy.) And while we can definitely do more as a city to make sure minority and low-income communities have the information they need in future races, according to the Oregonian’s own numbers, four out of five Portlanders successfully filled out their ballots without their brains exploding. So actually, I’d call that a big win. 

And that’s my problem with this poorly headlined article: The main thesis seems to be that just because one-in-five Portland voters chose not to cast votes in two races, this is somehow the fault of ranked choice voting. That’s bullshit. And here’s why: Let’s imagine ranked choice voting never existed, and Portlanders were still choosing just a single candidate for every office. Thanks to the general ineptitude of the current City Council—which inspired so many people to run against them—a huge number of candidates would’ve still been on that ballot. And if that had occurred, voters would have been confronted with the exact same conundrum.

Oh, and if you do happen to dip into the O’s article, here’s a little media studies trick: While most news outlets claim objectivity as their guiding star, if you want to spot potential bias, head to the final paragraph of just about any article, and see who gets the last word. In the case of this Oregonian story, the last word was given to a failed conservative Council candidate, Bob Weinstein, who freely admits he was never in favor of charter reform in the first place, and issued this damning indictment of ranked choice voting: “It’s very anti-democratic, to me, to have a result like this.”

I’m curious: Which of the following results is the most “anti-democratic”? Was it three-quarters of the population voting? Was it the large number of candidates who, after 100 years of being shut out of elections, were finally given a chance to fairly compete? Was it the actual result, which was getting (as mentioned before) the most diverse and politically balanced City Council we’ve had in the history of our city? Or was it “anti-democratic” simply because he lost?

Unfortunately, we’ll probably be reading a lot more thoughtless headlines and hearing a lot more anti-Charter Reform language from Portland’s conservative business class. Frankly, the old system worked GREAT for them, giving the wealthy an outsized voice and control over policy in City Hall. And even though the new council will have conservative voices who will fight valiantly to ensure the rich continue getting richer, that’s not good enough for those who want absolute power. In short, if you like what conservatives did to Measure 110, keep an eye out on what they’re planning to do to Charter Reform.

For the rest of us, there’s an old saying: “Progress, not perfection.” We’re sorry to break the hearts of the Oregonian headline writers and the bad actors who have dominated Portland politics for over a century, but new, vital forms of government—like any new plan or system that regular folks like you put into action every single day—will NEVER be perfect from the start, and need time and grace in order to operate at top proficiency. That said, if one-in-five voters refusing to choose a candidate in two races is the worst thing to happen in an election where we make sweeping changes for the very first time? I’d say democracy continues to be in pretty good shape. 

But that’s just my opinion—from deep in the “crater.”

October 17, 2014 Democrat Martha Coakley and Republican Charlie Baker are in a dead heat in the Massachusetts governor's race. The margin of error in the polls for both candidates is slim, but can voters in communities of color fill the margin with a victory, sending one of them to the governor's office? Are the campaigns of the independent candidates resonating with black, Latino, or Asian voters? This week on Basic Black, we look at how the candidates for governor are delivering their message to communities of color in the race to the finish line on November 4. Panelists:
- Latoyia Edwards, Anchor, New England Cable News
- Phillip Martin, Senior Reporter, WGBH News
- Peniel Joseph, Professor of History, Tufts University
- Marcela Garcia, Regular Contributor to the Boston Globe's Editorial and Op-Ed Pages
- Paul Watanabe, Director of the Institute for Asian American Studies, UMass, Boston

If Frenchmen can do it, Americans can.  

The voting for the bye-elections held for three Assembly constituencies in Karnataka on Wednesday is witnessing a good turnout as 26.33 per cent of voting was recorded till 11 A.M.

The residents of Chuglu village in Gumla Assembly constituency boycotted the polling on Wednesday to protest against poor roads, streets and other civic amenities. They are frustrated over lack of basic and essential infrastructure in their villages.

Brisk polling was seen for the Wayanad Lok Sabha and the Chelakkara assembly seats in Kerala as they witnessed a turnout of 20.54 and 19.08 per cent, respectively, after the first three hours of voting on Wednesday.

An eVoting pilot that would allow miltary staff stationed overseas to cast their ballots electronically has been postoned. The pilot program was scraped due to security concerns - concerns not just about the pilot, but the security of the Internet...

Over the weekend the democratic party in Michigan used an eVoting system for its primary. According to their reports, things went off without a hitch. In response to reports (reported here below), about the Pentagon scrapping their eVoting initiative, a...

Summary: I'm fairly certain that what I write here won't change the minds that need changing. But I feel like I need to make a statement anyway: your vote is secure.

There's a lot of fear mongering about the security of elections. I've wanted to discuss this for a while. I have several things in my background that have given me insight into how elections work. I was the CIO for the State of Utah. I was a member of the Lt Governor of Utah's voting equipment selection committee. And I've been involved in identity and security for several decades.

Let me give you the headline up front: committing election fraud in a way that changes the result is difficult, nearly impossible. Let's examine how elections are run and how fraud could happen to see why.

First a caveat: there is no single way that US elections are run. Elections in the US are quite decentralized. Each state has different election laws and in most cases the mechanics of running an election are given over to county clerks who must follow state law, but also have freedom to create their own workflows and processes within that law. There are 3244 counties in the US. The analysis that follows is generalized and likely more true of Utah, which I'm very familiar with, than other places. Still, I think the big ideas are largely the same everywhere.

The process of voting is divided into two parts: (1) voter registration and (2) voting. This is important because most people who make up scenarios to convince you that voting is insecure usually ignore voter registration. Registration requires that you provide an address. This is an important piece of information because if you're voting by mail, it's where the ballot will be mailed. If you're voting in person, you need to vote at a specific polling place depending on your address.

When you vote, you either mail back the ballot that was mailed to you at the address you provided or you go to your assigned polling place and fill out a ballot (usually via a voting machine). In either case, the ballot presented to you depends on your address since the candidates listed on your ballot depend on your voting precinct. Also, as of 2024, 35 states require voters to present identification at the polling place in order to vote. Of those that don't, many require it for voters who are voting for the first time after their registration.

Now, let's examine voting fraud and how it might work. One important factor is scale. You need to commit fraud at a scale necessary to impact the outcome. For small elections (say a single state legislative race or a small school board election) you don't need to change a lot of votes to change the outcome in a tight race—hundreds of votes might do it. For larger elections, like the presidential election, scale is a significant issue. I'm going to focus on presidential elections since they are the most consequential. Less consequential elections are not likely to attract the kind of money and talent necessary to commit election fraud.

A second factor is stealth. You have to keep the fraud from being discovered so that it's not reversed. Proving consequential fraud would likely result in the election being challenged and rerun. You don't have to identify who did it, just prove that it was done. So election fraud is much more dependent on not being discovered than commercial transaction fraud where the loss is likely to only be recoverable if the identity of the perpetrator is known.

The nature of presidential elections is greatly influenced by the electoral college system. You need to influence the votes in enough states to swing that state's electoral votes to the candidate you favor. You don't want to commit fraud where it's not needed because you'll waste money while increasing your chances of discovery. So, selecting the states where you want to commit fraud is critical. Each of those states will have different requirements, so you'll have to tailor your attack to each of them. Furthermore, you'll have to tailor your attack to each voting precinct within the counties you determine are the most likely to impact the election.

There are a few ways to attack an election:

• Sending your people to vote—for this to work, your fake voters have to have been registered and, in most cases, provide some form of ID. To register, they need a plausible address. The election office might not notice if one or two extra people with different last names are registered at a specific address, but they might if this is systematic or if an unreasonable number of people register at the same address. Remember that elections are run at the county level, so you have to assume that the election workers have a good understanding of the local environment. These fake voters now have to go to many different polling locations and cast a vote. They can't easily cast multiple ballots at the same polling location since the poll workers might remember them. So, you need lots of people going to lots of different polling locations.
• Intercepting mail-in ballots—for this to work, you have to register at someone else's home address and then get to the mail before they do or steal their ballots after they've filled them in and change the vote. This requires lots of people. You can't do this remotely. It requires "boots on the ground" as the saying goes. Furthermore, those people are exposed since they're looking in mailboxes in neighborhoods where they don't live. Doable, but not very stealthy.
• Paying people to vote—for this to work, you have to contact a lot of people, convince them to commit fraud, and then be satisfied with the fact that you'll never know if they voted for your candidate or not because ballots are secret. They could take your money and vote for whoever they want. Or just not vote at all unless you're supervising them, an activity that will call attention to you and your agents.
• Replacing real ballots with fake ones—for this to work, you have to create realistic facimiles of real ballots for many different polling places (remember they're different because of overlapping jurisdictions), intercept the ballots somewhere in transit or on delivery, and replace the real ballots with ones that you've filled out for your candidate. This likely involves subverting county election workers. Not just one, but many. Again, the risk of discovery goes up with each contact.
• Destroying ballots—for this to work, you need to destroy ballots that are for the candidate you don't want to win. You could simple destroy ballots without regard to how they're filled, but this won't assure you'll meet your goal. To be effective, you have to just destroy the ones for the other candidate and leave the ones for your candidate. Again, you will have to subvert election workers to get your hands on the ballots and determine who the ballot is for.
• Changing the results after the ballots are counted—for this to work, you have to either hack the machines that record the vote or hack the machines that are tabulating the vote. Hacking the machines won't work if the machines keep a paper audit trail and it's used to audit results. Hacking the tabulators means getting access to those machines. Recall those are kept at the county level, so you have to hack many in different locations unless a single county can swing the election your way.

I hope all of this has at least given you a feel for the scale and scope of the problem. Pulling it off successfully without anyone knowing it happened is a difficult problem. Each method involves many people being let in on the secret—in some cases a lot of people. This isn't an operation that a small group of hackers can reliably pull off. Having lots of people involved increases the chances that you'll be discovered. The decentralized and distributed nature of how elections are run is a feature and makes elections more secure and trustworthy.

On top of all this, election officials aren't stupid, lazy, or inept. Sure, you're going to find a few who are. But as a rule the elections officials I've interacted with at the state and county level are professionals who are attuned to these dangers and take active steps to protect against them. They are usually happy to talk about how they operate and will respond to polite requests for information about how they audit systems and the processes they have in place to protect the vote.

As an aside, do you know what's easier than committing election fraud? Using social media to convince people that election fraud is happening to reduce confidence in the election and sow discontent. Then you can use that discontent to challenge a legitimate election and maybe change the outcome. Ask yourself which is more likely.

Successfully changing the results of a presidential election isn't impossible. But the odds of doing so and not leaving any evidence—the perfect crime—are vanishingly small. I have confidence in the security of the US election system.

Photo Credit: Voting from DALL-E (public domain) Prompt: Draw a horizontal picture of a woman casting a ballot with a ballot box

Tags: voting identity security government

Elections hold immense significance in shaping the leadership of a nation or organisation, serving as a pivotal moment that influences the trajectory of the entity involved. Despite their centrality to modern democratic systems, elections face a significant hurdle: widespread mistrust in the electoral process. This pervasive lack of confidence poses a substantial threat to the democratic framework, even in the case of prominent democracies such as India and US, where inherent flaws persist in the electoral system. Issues such as vote rigging, electronic voting machine (EVM) hacking, election manipulation, and polling booth capturing remain prominent concerns within the current voting paradigm. Leveraging blockchain for electronic voting systems offers an effective solution to alleviate the prevailing apprehensions associated with e-voting. By incorporating blockchain into the electoral process, the integrity and security of the system could be significantly strengthened, addressing the current vulnerabilities and fostering trust in democratic elections.

Aim/Purpose: This review paper aims to unveil some underlying machine-learning classification algorithms used for political election predictions and how stack ensembles have been explored. Additionally, it examines the types of datasets available to researchers and presents the results they have achieved. Background: Predicting the outcomes of presidential elections has always been a significant aspect of political systems in numerous countries. Analysts and researchers examining political elections rely on existing datasets from various sources, including tweets, Facebook posts, and so forth to forecast future elections. However, these data sources often struggle to establish a direct correlation between voters and their voting patterns, primarily due to the manual nature of the voting process. Numerous factors influence election outcomes, including ethnicity, voter incentives, and campaign messages. The voting patterns of successors in regions of countries remain uncertain, and the reasons behind such patterns remain ambiguous. Methodology: The study examined a collection of articles obtained from Google Scholar, through search, focusing on the use of ensemble classifiers and machine learning classifiers and their application in predicting political elections through machine learning algorithms. Some specific keywords for the search include “ensemble classifier,” “political election prediction,” and “machine learning”, “stack ensemble”. Contribution: The study provides a broad and deep review of political election predictions through the use of machine learning algorithms and summarizes the major source of the dataset in the said analysis. Findings: Single classifiers have featured greatly in political election predictions, though ensemble classifiers have been used and have proven potent use in the said field is rather low. Recommendation for Researchers: The efficacy of stack classification algorithms can play a significant role in machine learning classification when modelled tactfully and is efficient in handling labelled datasets. however, runtime becomes a hindrance when the dataset grows larger with the increased number of base classifiers forming the stack. Future Research: There is the need to ensure a more comprehensive analysis, alternative data sources rather than depending largely on tweets, and explore ensemble machine learning classifiers in predicting political elections. Also, ensemble classification algorithms have indeed demonstrated superior performance when carefully chosen and combined.

"Noncitizens will vote in November. The only question is how many," according to the editorial board of Issues & Insights, a news and opinion site.

A judge in a rural Virginia city has ordered two officials there to certify the results of the election after they filed a lawsuit last month threatening not to certify unless they could hand-count the ballots.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday stepped in to prevent a group of known illegal aliens from voting next Tuesday.

The post Why Voting Matters was curated by information for practice.

‘People doing door-to-door outreach to voters are encountering men who prevent their wives from even conversing at the door.’

The post Why are so many women hiding their voting plans from their husbands? was curated by information for practice.

Abstract This paper proposes a method of evaluating elections in terms of freedom of choice. It evaluates voting institutions in terms of their allocation of control. Formally, the paper develops the symmetric power order, a measure of voting power for multicandidate elections. The measure generalizes standard pivotality-based voting power measures for binary elections, such as […]

The post Freedom and voting power was curated by information for practice.

by Wm. Steven Humphrey

If you’re reading this, you probably know the value of the Mercury’s news reporting, arts and culture coverage, event calendar, and the bevy of events we host throughout the year. The work we do helps our city shine, but we can’t do it without your support. If you believe Portland benefits from smart, local journalism and arts coverage, please consider making a small monthly contribution, because without you, there is no us. Thanks for your support!

GOOD MORNING, PORTLAND! ????

Hmmm... let's check the calendar to see if anything interesting is happening this week, and... OH WOW, THE ELECTION IS TOMORROW. If you haven't filled out your ballot yet, allow us to help! Check out the Mercury's Election Issue (in more than 500 spots around town) which comes complete with all our endorsements AND our handy-dandy voter cheat sheet! And despite what some people might say, voting is actually a lot easier than you might think. Now let's think a little about today's NEWS.

IN LOCAL NEWS:

• Let's start with the disappointing Oregonian headline of the day:

Oh, hello... unless I overslept again and missed it, THE ELECTION HASN'T HAPPENED YET, AND THEREFORE HAS NOT BEEN "UPENDED" BY ANYTHING. Despite the inference behind this very poorly worded headline, ranked-choice voting is actually super easy, and having a "sprawling" candidate field simply means that we finally have a far more diverse group of people (not just moneyed white dudes bought and paid for by local business interests) running for office. THAT IS A VERY GOOD THING. So allow me to rewrite this headline: "Ranked-choice voting, healthy and diverse candidate field is great for Portland City Council races and democracy in general." Oh, and you are WELCOME.

Filling out your ballot this weekend? GOOD! Need help? Voila, here's your 100% accurate Mercury Endorsement Cheat Sheet to help you fill out your ballot lickety-split!https://t.co/kKi0W0Yfmd

— Portland Mercury ???? (@portlandmercury) November 2, 2024

• As we know, Portland's attempts to construct and carry out good environmental policies has been hampered by our current city council (who, again, was bought and paid for by local business interests ????). However, that could very well change with a more progressive, people-oriented council, and a significant number of current candidates are promising to change this narrative if they are elected to office on Tuesday. Find out more with this interesting report from our Taylor Griggs.

• A suspect has been arrested in the Halloween shooting at a Vancouver mall which left one person dead and two injured. Vancouver resident Travis L. Ward was taken into custody by police and members of the city's SWAT team after receiving tips from Facebook users. The shooting was allegedly a targeted attack, and the suspect—who was reportedly dressed in black and wearing a clown mask—is scheduled to appear in court today.

When Skye Baskin died, it was initially portrayed as a failure of the Oregon State Hospital. New records reviewed by OPB indicate serious failures in the Douglas County Jail preceded his death.

Jail health care remains terrible in Oregon. https://t.co/Jwm2Z1Ziik

— Ryan Haas (@ryanjhaas) November 4, 2024

• One of Oregon's conservation greats, Bob Sallinger, has died suddenly at the age of 57. Known for leading such longtime environmental groups as Willamette Riverkeeper and Bird Conservation Oregon (BCO), Sallinger was a beloved figure who, according to the board of BCO, "was a pioneer in highlighting the importance of preserving and restoring wildlife habitat in urban areas, and a key player in efforts to conserve iconic Oregon landscapes, including the Elliott Forest, Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, and the Klamath Basin." He will be missed.

Looking for fun on election night? Join your friends at Mississippi Studios for the Mercury's official election night watch party—hosted by the hilarious Alex Falcone and Shain Brenden! (And what? IT'S FREE!)https://t.co/OXyBltoyPr

— Portland Mercury ???? (@portlandmercury) November 3, 2024

IN NATIONAL/WORLD NEWS:

• Since that's all anyone can think about at the moment, here's your ELECTION EVE HEADLINE ROUNDUP: "Harris and Trump head to key battleground states for final campaign sprint." "GOP primed to back Trump if he contests election." (And he will.) "North Carolina sees turnout record with more than 4.2M ballots cast at early in-person voting sites." "Trump doesn't rule out banning vaccines if he becomes president." "Pollster Behind Shock Iowa Poll Hits Back at Trump’s Attacks." "Trump says he doesn’t mind someone shooting at journalists at rally." "Ad showing women hiding their vote from their husbands sparks conservative anger." (Hee-hee-hee!)

Univision poll: Latino voters

Harris 64%
Trump 30%

69% said the Puerto Rico garbage remark was "more racist than humorous."

Oct. 29-Nov. 3, MOE +/-5%

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) November 4, 2024

This is NORTH CAROLINA the morning before the election. Donald Trump is on stage in 90 mins time at this 7,600 seater stadium and there are NO huge crowds outside and people are still walking in. I have never seen this at a Trump rally in a red state. pic.twitter.com/AXYFP3n7m0

— Phil Lavelle ????????/???? (@phillavelle) November 4, 2024

• The tech union for the New York Times—which helps handle such critical things as, say... oh, I don't know... election coverage—is going on strike today after management (who have reportedly known about this strike deadline for months) failed to come to an agreement with workers.

• A cyclone in the Caribbean is showing signs of developing into (yet another) hurricane this week as storm prepares to cross over Cuba and into the Gulf of Mexico.

I do believe that, despite this, she will win https://t.co/cOU7ZeWAKa

— Chase Mitchell (@ChaseMit) November 3, 2024

• RIP to one of the music industry's most prolific giants, Quincy Jones (who produced the best-selling album of all time, Michael Jackson's Thriller, as well as countless other memorable songs and movie scores) who has died at the age of 91.

• And finally... you and this goat paper towel dispenser share something in common a day before the election:

@henajahan_ #goat ♬ original sound - HenAJaHan_

In this week's episode we get into the primary free-for-all, from three towns that all want to be the first to vote first in the nation; to the dozens of lesser-known names on the primary ballot and what exactly they're doing there. #Politics #2016

Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke for the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division speaks during a news conference Friday announcing a lawsuit against the state of Georgia for its new voting law. Attorney General Merrick Garland is at right.; Credit: Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images

Attorney General Merrick Garland announced Friday that the U.S. Justice Department is suing the state of Georgia over its new voting law, saying that the controversial measure is intended to restrict ballot access to Black voters.

"Our complaint alleges that recent changes to Georgia's election laws were enacted with the purpose of denying or abridging the right of Black Georgians to vote on account of their race or color, in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act," Garland said at a news conference.

The lawsuit marks the first major action from the Biden administration to combat a series of new restrictive voting measures passed by Republican-led state legislatures. And it came on the eighth anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court decision to gut another key provision of the landmark Voting Rights Act, Section 5.

Garland noted that Georgia experienced record voter turnout and participation in the 2020 election cycle.

In March, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, a Republican, signed Senate Bill 202, a 98-page omnibus measure that makes sweeping changes to the state's absentee voting rules, adds new voter identification mandates and nearly cuts in half the amount of time for voters to request a mail-in ballot. It also expands early voting access for most counties and formally codifies Sunday voting hours as optional.

The legislation outlaws passing out food or drinks to voters within 150 feet of a polling place or too close to voters waiting in line, a provision that Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke, who heads the department's Civil Rights Division, highlighted at the press conference.

"Historically, minority voters in Georgia have been disproportionately more likely to wait in long lines to vote in person on Election Day," she said. "Given those long and protracted wait times, civic groups, including churches, have at times provided food and water to voters in line to make their wait more comfortable. As we allege in our complaint, this needless ban was passed with unlawful discriminatory intent."

Clarke also said the Georgia Legislature passed the bill through "a rushed process that departed from normal practice and procedure."

"The version of the bill that passed the state Senate ... was three pages long. Days later, the bill ballooned into over 90 pages in the House. The House held less than two hours of floor debate on the newly inflated SB 202 before Gov. Kemp signed it into law the same day," she said. "These legislative actions occurred at a time when the Black population in Georgia continues to steadily increase, and after a historic election that saw record voter turnout across the state, particularly for absentee voting, which Black voters are now more likely to use than white voters."

Garland said the lawsuit is the first of "many steps" the department is taking to protect the right to vote for all eligible voters. He said the Civil Rights Division will continue to examine voting laws that other states have passed.

"We will not hesitate to act," Garland said.

The Justice Department announced this month it would vigorously defend voting rights. Garland said that the department will double the number of voter enfranchisement lawyers and focus attention on litigation related to voting rights.

In response to the filing, Kemp said the lawsuit is "born out of the lies and misinformation the Biden administration has pushed against Georgia's Election Integrity Act from the start."

"[Biden and his allies] are weaponizing the U.S. Department of Justice to carry out their far-left agenda that undermines election integrity and empowers federal government overreach in our democracy," he said in a statement.

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, another Republican who notably defended the state's administration of the 2020 election, said in a statement he "looks forward to ... beating [the administration] in court."

Garland's announcement comes just days after Senate Republicans united to block Democrats' attempts to pass sweeping voting rights legislation.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., tweeted his approval of the lawsuit shortly after the announcement Friday.

"If Republicans think the fight for voting rights ended with their filibuster of the For the People Act, they are sorely mistaken," he wrote. "Glad to see the Biden Administration is joining this effort. We must protect our democracy."

The Republican National Committee also linked the failed Senate vote to the Department of Justice's lawsuit.

"After failing to sell the partisan federal election takeover known as H.R. 1 to the American people, Joe Biden is now weaponizing the Justice Department to attack election integrity," RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel said in a statement.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A voter marks his ballot at a polling place on Nov. 3, 2020, in Richland, Iowa. A new poll finds ensuring access to voting is more important than tamping down voter fraud for most Americans.; Credit: Mario Tama/Getty Images

A majority of Americans believes ensuring access to voting is more important than rooting out fraud, the latest NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist survey finds.

At the same time, there was broad agreement that people should have to show identification when they go to the polls.

Two-thirds of Americans also believe democracy is "under threat," but likely for very different reasons.

"For Democrats, Jan. 6 undoubtedly looms large," said Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion, referring to the violence and insurrection at the Capitol, "while, for Republicans, it's more likely about Trump and his claims of a rigged election."

Voting access vs. fraud

By a 56%-41% margin, survey respondents said making sure that everyone who wants to vote can do so is a bigger concern than making sure that no one who is ineligible votes.

But there were wide differences by political party and by race.

Among Democrats, almost 9 in 10 said access was more important, but almost three-quarters of Republicans said it was making sure no one votes who isn't eligible.

By race, a slim majority of whites said ensuring everyone who wants to vote can was most important, but almost two-thirds of nonwhites said so.

Photo ID is popular

Nearly 8 in 10 Americans said they believe voters should be required to show government-issued photo identification whenever they vote.

Majorities of Democrats, Republicans, independents, whites and nonwhites all said so. Democrats were far lower, though, with 57% believing photo ID should be required.

Biden holding steady

President Biden gets a 50% job approval rating, largely unchanged from last month. There is a sharp partisan divide with 9 in 10 Democrats approving, and more than 8 in 10 Republicans disapproving.

Biden continues to get his highest ratings when it comes to his handling of the coronavirus pandemic, and his economic approval is holding steady. But Americans have less confidence in his handling of foreign policy, especially immigration. His approval on immigration ticked up slightly from March when it was last measured in the poll.

By a 50%-43% margin, respondents said Biden had strengthened America's role on the world stage.

Americans are split about whether the country is headed in the right direction or not — 49% said it wasn't, 47% said it was. It's an improvement, however, from right after the Jan. 6 insurrection when three-quarters said the country was on the wrong track.

The tone has gotten worse in Washington since Biden was elected, 41% said, but that's better than the two-thirds who said so consistently during the Trump years.

Methodology: The poll of 1,115 U.S. adults was conducted using live telephone interviewers from June 22-29. Survey questions were available in English or Spanish. The full sample has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.7 percentage points with larger margins of error for smaller group subsets.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Help ISHN recognize innovative safety products by voting in our 8th annual Readers’ Choice Awards. Voting is under way and closes at 11:49 p.m. EST on May 31, 2020.

Innovative Mechanism Showcased at Consensus 2024 Elevates Viewer Engagement and Content Creation

This document is only available in PDF format.

Advanced electrode boilers are being installed to replace outdated, inefficient fuel-burning equipment in district heating applications as part of a broader effort to meet ambitious International Energy Agency decarbonization goals.

Instead of Project 2025's white supremacist vision for voting rights, Progress 2025 envisions universal early voting, a national federal holiday and more.

From vote-by-mail to making Election Day a national holiday, voting rights advocates are engaged in myriad efforts to increase voting access.

Some localities are granting limited voting rights to noncitizens, especially on issues directly affecting them.

AGU is an organization committed to a culture of Experiment / Learn / Adapt. In response to voter input over many elections, the Leadership Development / Governance Committee chose to test ranked choice voting in 4 elections – International Secretary, Board Director, Council Students and Council Early Career Scientists. In case you’re not familiar, this is an increasingly popular electoral system that allows voters to rank candidates by preference, meaning …

The post Experiment. Learn. Adapt.: Ranked Choice Voting in the 2024 AGU Elections appeared first on AGU Blogosphere.

"Slow. Expensive. Unreliable. Unverifiable." Those don't sound like the specs you'd put in a procurement document for a system undergirding electoral democracy, but they're the words Jason Kitcat used repeatedly to describe what Open Rights Group found when it observed the use of e-voting in England and Scotland's pilot trial of the technologies in May 2007.

Speaking at the release of ORG's election report, Kitcat described failures that ORG's volunteer observers saw or had reported to them. In Rushmoor, a candidate reported that the online ballot mis-identified his opponent's party affiliation. In Breckland, a manual recount of non-electronic ballots initially counted by computer turned up more than 50% more votes than the e-count. At least Breckland had a non-electronic ballot to fall back upon. In fully electronic systems being adopted in other districts, a "recount" can only repeat the same tally of bits, with no certain way to detect improper recording or tampering.

ORG concludes that, given the problems observed and the questions remaining unanswered, it cannot express confidence in the results declared in areas observed. Given these findings, ORG remains opposed to the introduction of e-voting and e-counting in the United Kingdom.

Unfortunately, but unsurprisingly, ORG's findings mirror those of EFF and others regarding United States deployment of e-voting. In a process led by vendors, veiled in proprietary trade secrecy, with inadequate attention to the security and verification required for confidence in democratic elections, e-voting and non-transparent e-counting do not serve the American or British citizenry. ORG is taking great steps to expose the flaws and push for more accountable voting.

An elected Washington, D.C., official was among six people who were fined by the city this week after voting in the 2020 elections twice.

Presidential elections often get the highest voter turnout, which is already proving true in Spokane County. With five days left to vote, nearly 48% of the county's roughly 375,000 registered voters have already returned their ballots, according to unofficial statistics provided by the Spokane County Elections Office…

On Saturday 2nd April some of the region’s top authorities on voting reform will gather in Kings Heath, Birmingham, to present their perspectives

Richard Lutz carries out his electoral duties by email.

John Lewis has gotten into a lot of trouble in his life. The now 17-term House Representative from Atlanta has been arrested 45 times – five as a U.S. congressman. One of the original Freedom Riders , Lewis trained in nonviolent resistance, but faced a lot of brutality during his time as a young activist in the civil rights movement. He suffered harassment and attacks during lunch counter sit-ins in Nashville, his skull was fractured by a blow from a Klansman in 1961, and he was badly beaten after crossing the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama on Bloody Sunday .

Updated at 9 p.m. ET Russia's military intelligence agency launched an attack days before Election Day on a U.S. company that provides election services and systems, including voter registration, according to a top-secret report posted Monday by The Intercept . The news site published a report, with redactions, by the National Security Agency that described the Russian spear-phishing scheme, one it described as perpetrated by the same intelligence agency — the GRU — that the Obama administration imposed sanctions on for the 2016 cyber mischief. According to the NSA report, Russian hackers sent emails to people who worked at a company that provides state and local election offices with voter registration systems, trying to trick them into giving up their user credentials. The Intercept reports, "At least one of the employee accounts was likely compromised, the agency concluded." The NSA report says that the Russians then used information from that account to launch a separate phishing

Today we go inside San Quentin’s mock elections. Then, we hear about comic books and mental health — for veterans. And, the passionate mix of music and movement of Flamenco.

A senior Conservative MP is comparing a government proposal for online voting in the House of Commons to the dating app Tinder.

A surprising number of swing voters may be listening to Howard Stern on their way to church.

Secretary of State Dr. Shirley Weber walks us through overseeing elections across California. Also, a look at early ballot returns and vote tracking with Political Data. Finally, the California Voter Foundation provides last minute voting tips.

"We shouldn’t accept an election system where most of us don’t have a voice." -- Nick Troiano, Denver

Colorado isn’t ready for major changes to our election system, even if adopting an all-party primary and ranked-choice general election could mean more and perhaps better choices for voters in future years.

Yale medical school’s chief psychiatry resident told a TV host that people should avoid their Trump-voting relatives on Thanksgiving and Christmas. While on MSNBC with host Joy Reid, Amanda Calhoun said if you have relatives who voted for Trump, “it’s completely fine to not be around those people and to tell them why.” Calhoun suggested […]

The post Yale psychiatrist says you should avoid your Trump-voting relatives during the holidays appeared first on Liberty Unyielding.

I’m often asked if I miss working in the House of Commons. Of course I do; it’s one of the most amazing places in the world and remains the cockpit of our nation.There are obviously days I miss it more than others, usually around the big national moments. Whatever your view of Kim Leadbeater’s private member’s bill—the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill—its second reading this month will be one of those big moments.Kim is a friend of mine, and we spoke before she decided to put her bill forward after it topped the private members’ ballot at the start of the new parliament. My advice was to proceed with great care, to remember that this will take over your career in many ways, and to read the report produced earlier this year by the Health and Social Care Committee, which I chaired, on the subject of assisted dying/assisted...

Congress is voting on a bill Tuesday that will empower the executive branch to remove the tax-exempt status from any nonprofit it deems to be supporting terrorists.

The justices declined to hear the appeal of the Ferguson-Florissant district over its at-large board elections, which lower courts invalidated as violating the Voting Rights Act.

A recent exhibition shows how soldiers sent in votes during the Civil War and World War II, as many Americans would in 2020 following the spread of the Covid-19 pandemic

A handful of voting stations were temporarily closed due to power outages on Saturday morning during the final day of B.C.’s provincial election, while the only station in Dease Lake was fully closed because an election official had travel difficulties.

A Penn State political scientist discusses the importance of voting and the election certification process.