COLUMBUS, Ohio – After scoring a victory in court, the Ohio Secretary of State's Office is expected to follow through on a massive voter registration purge today.

The purge is happening despite discovering mistakes on the list, released by Secretary of State Frank LaRose, of roughly 235,000 voters at risk of losing their registrations.

Jen Miller, executive director of the League of Women Voters of Ohio, says the list erroneously includes names of some voters who are actually eligible to vote.

"Thousands of individuals on the list had voted as recently as 2018, and by no means should be removed,” says Miller. “Others may not have gotten proper notification because of discrepancies between counties' lists and Secretary of State LaRose's voter look-up website."

This week, a U.S. District Court judge denied a request to temporarily halt the removal process, noting that LaRose has been transparent in releasing the registration list and restored registrants who were eligible. Nearly 12,000 people on the list updated their registration information and won't be removed.

Miller says voting-rights groups appreciate the Secretary of State's efforts to ensure a quality review of the rolls, but contend it wasn't as in-depth as what they'd prefer.

"At the end of the day the buck stops with the secretary [of state],” says Miller. “Both in federal law and state law, it is the secretary's job to make sure that voter rolls are accurate – and that includes making sure that people are not wrongfully removed through this purge policy."

Miller encourages all Ohio voters to check their status on the Secretary of State's website, to ensure they don't have problems before the Oct. 7 deadline to register.

"And if it says you're 'active,' that means your registration is good to go,” says Miller. “If it says 'confirmation,' you should absolutely re-register. If your name isn't there at all, you definitely need to register. You have 30 days to do so."

If an Ohio voter is inactive for a two years, a notification is sent of their pending registration cancellation. If they fail to respond and don't vote for four years, they can be removed from the rolls.

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the system last year, despite arguments that it may violate the National Voting Rights Act.


This story was produced in association with Media in the Public Interest, and funded in part by the George Gund Foundation.


get more stories like this via email

A South Dakota Senate committee considers several bills today to overhaul rules for getting citizen-led measures on the ballot.

The proposals are drawing sharp debate about the future of direct democracy. Republican lawmakers want stricter requirements for ballot questions when South Dakota residents or affiliated organizations seek things like a constitutional amendment. One bill calls for raising the approval threshold to 60% of the vote when a measure gets onto the ballot.

Stacy Roberts, board co-chair for the advocacy group Dakota Rural Action, said the attempt appears to undermine voters' intelligence.

"They're basically telling the population of South Dakota that they don't know what they're voting for, and I think that's very untrue," Roberts asserted.

Whether it is signing a petition or deciding a ballot measure on Election Day, Roberts feels voters are well-informed. She likens the bills to "sour grapes" following the success of recent initiatives, like Medicaid expansion. Bill sponsors said the ballots have been cluttered with too many citizen-led initiatives and higher standards are needed for constitutional changes.

Roberts countered the process has enough safeguards to ensure the integrity of South Dakota's Constitution. Bill sponsors argued some measures are driven by well-funded, out-of-state groups. But Roberts contended making it harder to approve them actually puts more power in the hands of wealthy influencers, not the people.

"Large funders get a more disproportionate voice and a seat at the table when you make these changes," Roberts emphasized.

She pointed to a grassroots-led ballot question last fall, when South Dakota voters overturned a controversial law dealing with carbon pipeline projects.

Historians noted South Dakota has been a trailblazer, as the first state to embrace this form of democracy. Roberts added the ballot initiative process has benefited both sides of the political aisle and those unhappy with recent results should take it up with the voters, not change the rules.

"We all can work on it and change it," Roberts underscored. "That makes for a much more engaged general population."

The measures have already cleared the House. If the Senate advances them, the two proposals would go on the 2026 ballot, with voters having the final say on updating requirements.

Legislative bills on housing have seen mixed results in Montana so far this session.

A state nonprofit group held an online training on how to provide public comment about those bills - aimed at young people, for whom affordable housing is a major challenge.

Montana's population grew by over 36,000 people between 2020 and early 2024, creating massive housing shortages and skyrocketing prices.

Sage Bennett, housing organizer with the advocacy group Forward Montana, said providing written comments on bills or verbal comments during hearings can help expand others' worldviews.

"You don't have to be a policy expert to share testimony," said Bennett. "That's what our elected officials are there to understand. And we are there to provide comment, to be able to have them understand the real world impacts that these policies have on us."

Housing-related bills working their way through the Legislature include one to amend zoning laws to allow taller buildings, and another to establish a grant program to create permanent supportive housing for people dealing with homelessness.

A bill to provide some renters the first right to buy a property if their landlord intends to sell was tabled last week.

Those who want to comment online must create an account and register for a bill hearing at least two hours in advance.

Forward Montana's State Legislative Coordinator John Bazant said commenters should come prepared, but be flexible, as time allotments for comments may change.

"This one-minute warning beep can be pretty jarring and it will probably interrupt you," said Bazant. "And then because it can depend on how long they give you for your testimony, having a long version and a short version is a ton of help."

According to the Montana Budget and Policy Center, workers paid the state's $10.55 minimum wage would have to work 80 to 90 hours per week to afford fair-market rent for a two-bedroom apartment in Flathead, Gallatin, Missoula, and three other counties.

The Missouri House Committee on Elections is reviewing key legislation that could shape the state's voting process.

Proposals include expanding early voting and granting poll challengers greater access to voting locations.

One of the most significant proposed bills would make it a felony to threaten election officials, such as judges, clerks, and even poll workers.

Last October, Eastern Missouri's U.S. Attorney's Office appointed District Election Officers to address threats, voting complaints, and fraud. State Rep. Peggy McGaugh - R-Carrollton - is the bill's sponsor.

"They have been the victims of just some harmful things to their jobs and their security," said McGaugh. "And so I just need to protect them. People can do some hateful things, and so I needed to get a provision out there, that they would be safe."

Opponents of this type of legislation argue it could violate First Amendment rights, claiming it might criminalize not just threats but also protected political speech.

Rep. McGaugh highlighted that Missouri's elections have, for the most part, stayed out of the national spotlight - avoiding the turmoil seen in other states.

She credited this stability to the strong collaboration among election officials at all levels of the process.

"You don't hear about the pulling up to the courthouse with vans full of boxes with ballots - all the fraud," said McGaugh, "because we don't do that in Missouri. "

A 2024 survey by the Brennan Center for Justice found that 27% of local election officials knew colleagues who resigned over safety concerns, up from 18% in 2023, and nearly 20% may leave before the 2026 midterm elections.

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




get more stories like this via email