Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes testified before Congress on Wednesday about the state of our elections system. Public confidence in the process has been discredited, leading to increased threats against election workers, he said, and added that election administrators have not received sustained and dependable federal funding, even after being declared critical infrastructure by the Department of Homeland Security.
"Do the same for highways and dams and railroads and see what happens. We implore you, please consider. If this is such a big deal and if it is so important that we continue to have free, fair and secure elections - fund them," he said.
Despite the federal government having sought to improve election administration through a grant program called the Help America Vote Act, unpredictable funding levels have left state officials unable to adequately plan budgets. Fontes said rising mis- and disinformation surrounding elections, as well as threats against elections workers, make the grants especially important.
During his testimony, Fontes argued that noncitizen voting is not a widespread or even significant problem. He recalled that in 2004, Arizona approved Proposition 200, which requires proof of citizenship to vote. But according to a 2016 study by the Brennan Center for Justice, improper noncitizen votes accounted for one out of every 10,000 votes across 42 jurisdictions. Fontes said the paranoia around what he terms a "fake problem" is having real impacts on eligible voters. During his time as Maricopa County recorder, he says his office found 94,000 rejected voter registration forms.
"Many, many thousands of them duplicate forms where voters tried and tried and tried again to register," he said. "And after thorough research, 47,000 eligible American citizens were found to have been denied the right to vote, because of that law."
Fontes called the situation embarrassing. Funding for the federal government is set to expire at the end of the month, and House Speaker Mike Johnson is facing pressure from House Republicans to use the deadline to pass the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, which would mandate proof of citizenship in order to vote. Noncitizen voting is already illegal.
get more stories like this via email
Republicans in Washington, D.C. remain focused on greatly reducing federal spending. However, a backlash is mounting in Congressional districts, including Minnesota, and some constituents feel ignored. Whether it's executive orders by the Trump administration or budget votes taking shape in Congress, the dramatic downsizing of federal agencies, programs and services has led to heightened concern about the impact on a host of populations.
Brian Vroman, a Grand Rapids resident, said he's worried about the possibility of steep Medicaid cuts. He says even if it's uncomfortable for House Republicans, they still should have face-to-face conversations.
"There's a lot of pent-up anger, frustration and I think that the only way to alleviate that is to have open dialogue. We're not at war with each other," he explained.
Vroman's congressman, Rep. Pete Stauber, R-Duluth, could not be reached for comment. Protesters have gathered outside his office to demand a town hall. GOP leaders have urged a pause on such events to avoid the backlash while painting attendees of recent meetings as "paid activists." Vroman is part of a left-leaning grassroots group, but says he's not paid for his actions and has voted for both parties.
Sarah Jaynes, executive director of the Rural Democracy Initiative, said it's reasonable for voters in conservative districts, including those who consistently vote Republican, to feel blindsided by some of these moves and demand answers. She feels some of the organizing is having an effect.
"[Some] members of Congress are quietly speaking up, and ensuring that funding is continuing to move into their communities," she said.
National political publications have reported that some House GOP members have had "back channel" conversations with the White House to reverse cuts led by Trump adviser Elon Musk. While Democrats have criticized the manner and scope of spending reductions, they too are facing pressure to host more meetings to highlight voter frustration. Some Democrats are now holding town halls in GOP districts.
Disclosure: Rural Democracy Initiative contributes to our fund for reporting on Environment, Health Issues, Rural/Farming, Social Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
With Pennsylvania's primary election set for May 20, a nonpartisan group is working to raise awareness about voter registration.
Over 8.7 million Pennsylvanians are eligible to vote in municipal elections.
Amy Widestrom - the executive director of the League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania - said she is concerned about low turnout in local races, noting Montgomery County's 41.9% turnout in 2023.
She says one precinct saw less than 1% - only 379 voters. She emphasized the importance of voting for key positions.
"These are the people that are doing the business of our local counties and our local schools and our local judges and our state courthouses," said Widestrom. "And so these are extraordinarily important elections. And yet, in 2023 for the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, we only got a 35% turnout."
She adds Pennsylvanians must register to vote by May 5 to cast a ballot in the primary, and the last day to apply for a mail-in-ballot is May 13.
Widestrom said low voter turnout has been an ongoing issue, especially in off-cycle elections like primaries and odd-year general elections.
She added that the League will host civic engagement events to educate voters on upcoming races.
"We'll be hosting a series of webinars called ballot box basics, highlighting both the importance of these municipal elections, but also, how do you learn about these candidates?" said Widestrom. "So we're going to host a webinar on judging our judges. How do we learn about the judicial candidates?"
Widestrom added that the League will be updating their website at Vote411.org with statewide candidate information before Pennsylvanians head to the polls or mail in their ballot.
Disclosure: League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania contributes to our fund for reporting. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
More testimony was heard yesterday about term limit reforms in North Dakota, an issue voters around the state might have to decide again.
In 2022, North Dakota voters approved imposing term limits for state lawmakers and the governor. Legislators can no longer serve more than eight years in the House and Senate.
But a handful of bills this session call for another ballot question, to raise state lawmakers' term limit to 12 years.
Sen. Justin Gerhardt, R-Mandan, sponsor of one bill, said the new framework threatens the value of experience at the State Capitol.
"Our citizen-led Legislature meets for only 80 days every two years," Gerhardt pointed out. "By the time a new legislator gets a handle on the budget process, legislative rules and the needs of their district, they're already on their way out the door."
He added his bill also addresses the issue of lawmakers who are appointed to fill a seat. Opponents said the moves undermine the will of the voters.
A separate bill proposing a new statewide vote on the prospective changes will be heard this morning. If one of the measures advances to the ballot, it likely would come up in the 2026 general election.
Those who want term limits said they foster fresh voices in policymaking.
Kevin Herrmann, a resident of Beulah, is one of the many people to testify against the new reform efforts.
"This resolution is a way for legislators to get back their legislative power over the citizens of North Dakota," Herrmann contended.
Another thorny element to this debate is, the 2022 ballot question included language prohibiting state lawmakers from trying to force the issue down the road. One of the bills in question repeals the language in trying to get the question back on the ballot. Backers of the proposals acknowledge they are likely to draw court challenges over constitutional arguments.
Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.
get more stories like this via email