RENO, Nev. – Whose House? Our House!

That's the slogan being shouted at more than 200 rallies across the nation Thursday – organized by the nonprofit group Indivisible.

The group’s Northern Nevada chapter is taking part by holding a rally at noon in Reno at the corner of Liberty and Virginia streets in front of the Thompson Federal Building.

Laynette Evans, a co-founder of the Northern Nevada chapter of Indivisible, says she wants Nevada's two U.S. senators and four House members to know that their constituents are paying attention.

"We are gathering to let our members of Congress know that we are still here, that we are watching them and asking them to pass legislation that supports our progressive values," she states.

Democrats who now control Congress are expected to unveil House Resolution 1 – a package of bills to reduce money in politics, force more transparency in donations to candidates and social media ads, and introduce a nationwide automatic voter registration system that asks people to opt out rather than opt in.

The Las Vegas chapter of Indivisible is calling on all Nevadans to tweet up a storm at noon with hashtags #OurHouse and #EyesOnYou.

Conservative groups are urging the president to stand firm and use the government shutdown to force funding for a border wall.

Evans supports efforts to reopen the government without funding President Donald Trump's border wall, which she maintains would push migrants into more dangerous terrain, block animal migration and lead to a massive legal fight over eminent domain.

"A physical wall is very problematic and it's not an effective use of federal funds for border security,” she stresses. “We need technology."

The rallies also are calling for action on the "green new deal," a series of proposals to reinstate many of the environmental protections that have been rolled back under the Trump administration.


get more stories like this via email

With just under 40 days before the November election, Wisconsin is again mired in controversy over the use of ballot drop boxes and a civic engagement group hopes it does not dovetail into what it described as voter suppression tactics.

Voting access advocates saw a victory over the summer when the Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed a near-total ban on drop boxes for absentee ballots. But this past weekend, the mayor of Wausau, a vocal opponent of the option, held a public event where he removed a drop box.

Sam Liebert, Wisconsin state director for the group All Voting is Local, feels it is an extension of the persistent -- and false -- claims about the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.

"This is just another part of a larger puzzle of continued voter suppression and trying to have fewer people vote in the upcoming November election," Liebert contended.

The mayor has defended his actions, insisting he did nothing wrong. Opponents of drop boxes claim they could be tampered with and said prohibiting them could help ensure election integrity. But election policy analysts countered they are a proven and safe option.

All Voting is Local and other advocates have asked state authorities to look into the matter. The local district attorney is pursuing an investigation.

Even though the state's highest court made this voting tool legal again, local administrators still have the option to decide whether to place drop boxes around their communities. Liebert pointed out those in leadership positions and the public should know how beneficial drop boxes are in giving everyone a chance to vote.

"They help so many types of voters," Liebert emphasized. "Whether they're voters with disabilities, they're third-shift workers, they're single parents, all types of people benefit from having ballot drop boxes."

Earlier this month, a similar controversy arose over guidance from the Dodge County Sheriff's Office to local election clerks. With Wisconsin again viewed as a battleground state, Liebert added such examples serve as a reminder for all entities playing a role in carrying out elections to ensure a safe and accessible environment for voters.

Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.


get more stories like this via email

In Ohio's 43rd House District race in Toledo, candidates are discussing a range of issues of interest to their constituents.

Incumbent Rep. Michele Grim, D-Toledo, has been vocal about the recent constitutional amendment on reproductive rights and said her platform addresses several critical areas, including economic development, health care, and public safety.

"Ohio enshrined reproductive rights into the Constitution last November," Grim noted. "But the work is not done because laws still limit women to obtain abortions in a timely manner."

While reproductive rights are part of the conversation, Grim said she is focused on improving health care access, supporting small businesses, and reducing gun violence. Recently, she announced $67 million in state funding for the Building Demolition and Site Revitalization Program, aimed at tearing down almost 1,300 blighted structures across several counties, including Lucas. The funding is intended to support community revitalization efforts and attract investments.

Wendi Hendricks, Grim's Republican challenger, is centering her campaign on public safety and crime reduction. She acknowledged the recent constitutional decision on abortion rights reflects the will of Ohioans, and while she respects the outcome, she believes issues like safety and local economic growth are more pressing concerns for voters in District 43.

"The people in Ohio spoke and answered how they want that to move forward," Hendricks noted. "It's really a nonissue for this campaign. I stand with my constituents and right now they're screaming, 'Safety, safety, safety.'"

Hendricks' platform highlights the importance of working with law enforcement to address crime in Toledo, emphasizing her commitment to improving community safety.

Both candidates bring different areas of focus to the race, offering voters a choice between addressing local economic and safety issues while navigating broader statewide and national concerns.


get more stories like this via email

With the election six weeks away, concern is building about attempts to intimidate voters at the polls - so, lawmakers are taking action at the state and federal levels.

On Tuesday, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the PEACE Act, which makes California the first state in the nation to state explicitly that openly carrying a gun in or near a polling place constitutes illegal harassment.

Sean Morales-Doyle, director of the Voting Rights Program for the nonprofit Brennan Center for Justice, said the measure is important.

"It represents some really commonsense principles. All voters, all election workers, should be able to participate and run our democracy free from intimidation. And visible guns around our elections are intimidating," he said.

A recent survey of election workers from the Brennan Center found that 40% report being subject to threats, abuse, or harassment.

On Wednesday, Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., introduced a bill to ban open carry of firearms in polling places nationwide - noting the country has a long history of scare tactics on Election Day.

"There's individuals out there, stoked by partisan rhetoric and false narratives about election fraud, that have taken it upon themselves to either discourage at a minimum, or sometimes outright intimidate people into not letting their voice be heard in the democratic process," Padilla said.

Both political parties plan to have poll watchers present this year. The Brennan Center has set up a hotline at 866-OUR-VOTE for people to report any efforts to intimidate voters or election workers.


get more stories like this via email