FARGO, N.D. -- This week's municipal election in Fargo ushered in a new approach to the democratic process, as the city became the first in the nation to try "approval voting."

The system allows a voter to endorse as many people in a multi-candidate race as he or she likes. However, there aren't multiple winners; the candidate with the most votes still declares victory.

Aaron Hamlin, executive director of The Center for Election Science, which is helping spearhead the movement, said the current standard of deciding on one candidate has too many problems.

"And that really creates a lot of limitations for the voter, because it means they aren't able to fully express themselves," he said, "and we see all kinds of consequences, like vote-splitting between candidates and so on."

Skeptics of approval voting have wondered if voters still will be tempted to use ballot strategy by second guessing adding other choices so they don't harm their preferred candidate. They also have said a candidate still can win with less than 50% of the vote and not have a clear mandate to assume office. However, Hamlin said no voting method, including ranked choice, can ever guarantee a majority when there are more than two candidates.

Jed Limke, who chairs the group Reform Fargo, helped get the question of switching to approval voting on the 2018 ballot, where it passed. He said alternative methods, such as a runoff system, have other side effects, such as requiring multiple elections.

"That stretches the campaign season out, that drains the resources of the candidates," he said. "High costs for running as a candidate limit the ability for all citizens to run for office."

He said that's why approval voting is a better option; it doesn't require election authorities to incur added expenses for new software and other needs.

Elsewhere in the country, the option will be considered by St. Louis voters this fall, and there's a push to get it on the ballot in Colorado.

Many Texans feel strongly, one way or another, about the proposed school voucher bill before state lawmakers. Gov. Greg Abbott has proposed a plan to provide $10,000 vouchers to parents to help cover the cost of private schools.

Christina Sanders, founder of the nonprofit PoliChic Engagement Fund, said taxpayers should pay close attention to the details of the policy.

"Taking that money away from schools and forcing our districts to shut down schools and forcing teachers to not be able to have living wages. So just the school conversation in general is something that people should really pay attention to," she explained.

Hundreds of Texas school teachers spent their spring break testifying before lawmakers against the bill. They say vouchers will take needed funds away from public schools. The governor says vouchers give parents the freedom to make the best education choices for their children and will benefit students from low-income households.

Sanders says whether it's school choice or another issue before the legislature, the public should remember that lawmakers work for them, and you have the right to voice your opinion.

"Showing up and holding people accountable that work for you, which is your representative, and ensuring that they are putting resources where you would like them to go is the whole point of a representative republic," Sanders said.

GOP lawmakers tried unsuccessfully to pass school vouchers in the last legislative session.

Sanders said the session is available online and people can also contact representatives by email, phone, or on social media.

"Our organization can help prepare any individual who wants to testify and just tell their story and publicly talk about and share with the committee that's making the decision about what their ideas are and what their experience has been and what they'd like to see," Sanders concluded.

Adrian Fontes, Arizona Secretary of State, said he was not shocked but disappointed when he found out the Trump administration had cut funding for the national election security program.

It is housed within the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. A number of employees who worked with election officials to provide assessments and identify election threats were placed on leave pending review. Fontes emphasized the workers were crucial in helping Arizona run a smooth operation last November, despite 15 bomb threats.

Now Fontes, a Democrat, is working to create an independent organization to fulfill a similar role. He is getting support from bipartisan stakeholders around the country.

"We've had our knees kicked out from underneath us," Fontes argued. "Foreign advisories now have an open door to come in and do all kinds of things, including repeating the pattern of bomb threats that are intended specifically to disrupt our elections on Election Day like we saw in November."

Fontes stressed without support and resources provided through the Elections Infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis Center, the spread of election misinformation and election official deepfakes will increase, posing a direct threat to peoples' ability to vote intelligently.

Fontes acknowledged Trump won the election and has the right to restructure and redirect federal resources, but added the president does not have the right to "eviscerate the ability to protect American elections."

Fontes sent his proposal for the nongovernmental organization to the National Association of Secretaries of State.

"I think across the board people understand the value of what was lost," Fontes explained. "I'm just happy that staff was on top of it and that my office was willing to make this proposal out there for folks to consider."

Fontes noted he has received a positive reception from his Republican colleagues, adding election administrators have a real issue on their hands and he will not sit back with his arms crossed.

"I hate playing the role of canary in the coal mine," Fontes underscored. "But right now, the canary was put on permanent leave and there is nobody protecting the coal miners which are our voters so it is a bad, bad situation."

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


get more stories like this via email

Indiana lawmakers are considering a plan to block college students from using school-issued IDs to vote.

Sen. Blake Doriot, R-Goshen, said it will prevent fraud. Students argued the change will make voting harder. The proposal affects out-of-state students most, forcing some to travel home to vote.

Manal Hussain, a junior at Indiana University-Indianapolis, said the bill creates unnecessary hurdles for students to cast a ballot.

"Instead of empowering them to be civically engaged this bill place unnecessary barriers in their way," Hussain contended. "Let's be clear that there is no evidence that student IDs are any less reliable than other forms of government-issued identification."

The bill would remove public college IDs from the list of acceptable voter IDs. Right now, students can vote with school IDs if they register in the county where they cast ballots. The bill would require an Indiana government-issued ID instead. Opponents said it creates barriers, especially for students without cars or proper documents. They warned it could further lower turnout in a state with already poor participation.

Doriot cited a conservative group's claim some voters cast ballots in multiple states.

"If these students wish to vote in Indiana, they must establish residency like any other individual that moves to our state," Doriot argued. "Let me be clear, my intention is not to prevent students from voting."

Critics countered there is little proof student IDs cause fraud, and said the bill mainly affects young voters, who tend to vote for Democrats. The House Elections and Apportionment Committee will decide whether to advance the bill. If approved, the full House will vote before it reaches the governor. Students and voting rights groups plan to keep fighting it.


get more stories like this via email