A court hearing next week could help determine whether an eastern South Dakota mayor will face a recall election. Events are rare for this state, but there is a strong appetite for "direct democracy," according to one expert. The legal wrangling surrounding a possible recall vote concerns the mayor of Baltic, with the next hearing scheduled for June 15th.

Joshua Spivak, author and senior research fellow at the Hugh L. Carey Institute for Government Reform at Wagner College and expert on recall elections, said South Dakota law prevents statewide officeholders from being recalled; it has set a tone that even local leaders have rarely. But he said residents and activist groups are showing a lot of interest in statewide ballot initiatives.

"Voters like this," he said. "And it's not a conservative and it's not a liberal position to like direct democracy."

Spivak added several proposed statewide ballot questions are already going through approval stages for the 2024 election. It follows high-profile questions put before South Dakota voters in recent years. He described it as a "counter-pushback" toward legislative efforts to add more requirements for initiated measures. Those who support such moves worry about what they call "citizen lawmakers" working around the Legislature.

In states where restrictions to circulating petitions for ballot questions have been added, it has often been Republican lawmakers pushing for those changes. So far, Spivak explained, those policymakers have not paid the price come election time. But he added it is fair to question if their constituents will eventually have a change of heart.

"There is a strong possibility, especially if somebody's running an insurgent campaign against these election officials saying, 'Hey, I support your right to make your own choices.' They didn't," he said.

Experts say the dynamic is interesting for South Dakota because it was the first state to adopt the initiative and referendum process on a statewide level. As for recall elections, Spivak's research notes there is only one documented vote happening in South Dakota in the past dozen years. That happened in Whitewood, where the election official in question survived the effort to vote them out of office.


get more stories like this via email

Voting rights advocates are asking for the immediate reinstatement of more than 1,600 Virginia voters whose registrations were purged as part of a state program initiated by Gov. Glenn Youngkin's Executive Order 35.

The removals, revealed as part of a federal lawsuit, are being challenged by the Justice Department and advocacy groups. They claim the purge violates federal law by disenfranchising eligible voters during the 90-day "quiet period" before the November election.

Joan Porte, president of the League of Women Voters of Virginia, expressed concerns about excluding certain groups, especially immigrants and people of color.

"Relying on outdated and flawed data to remove thousands of people from the rolls is reckless," Porte asserted. "Even further, removing people from the polls during the 90 days before a federal election is illegal and prohibited by the National Voting Rights Act."

Gov. Youngkin defended the process, claiming it removes groups, including noncitizens, who have -- either accidentally or intentionally -- attempted to register to vote.

Monica Sarmiento, executive director of the Virginia Coalition for Immigrant Rights, is among those demanding the restoration of all eligible voters, citing the risk of disenfranchisement from the governor's actions on Aug. 7.

"Which we believe has illegally disenfranchised naturalized voters in Virginia," Sarmiento contended. "Naturalized citizens are Americans and have every right to cast their vote."

The lawsuit asks the court to take four key actions: Declare the purge program violates the National Voter Registration Act, order the defendants to stop the program, direct them to reinstate anyone wrongly removed from the voter rolls unless it was confirmed they are not a citizen and require the defendants to notify affected voters they are still and can cast a regular ballot if eligible.


get more stories like this via email

Prominent Black church leaders and faith influencers from coast to coast are taking their message beyond the pulpit and going door to door to mobilize Black communities to vote.

Under the banner of The Black Church PAC, these leaders are focused on voter education and empowerment through an initiative called "100-K Strong: Knock for Change, Vote for Justice." The group also organizes voter-registration drives, advocates for policy reforms, and pushes for changes they feel reflect the core values of the Black faith community.

"We have secured key commitments from key clergy members and community members to engage with 100,000 residents - knocking on their doors, dropping literature," said Pastor Mike McBride, senior pastor of The Way Christian Center in Berkeley, California, and co-chair of the PAC.

McBride said the Black Church PAC is focusing its efforts in six battleground states: Florida, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

He also warned that the rise of social media and the spread of misinformation are actively working to suppress voters. To help counteract this trend, he said the Black Church PAC has spoken to 300,000 voters over the course of 30 tour dates.

"What we want to ensure is that, particularly in swing states, that we can grow the kind of universe of voters who turn out on voting day," he said, "just by making sure they have the right information and the right reminder - and when needed, a ride to the polls."

He also acknowledged that voter intimidation at the polls is real. He said his organization has partnered with other clergy for poll-watching programs, to help protect voters as they wait in line to exercise their 15th Amendment right.


get more stories like this via email

The 2024 election is hitting its home stretch, and many Washingtonians have already received their ballots in the mail. Even with Election Day approaching, there's still time for people to do research and make informed decisions with their votes.

Cynthia Stewart, first vice president of the League of Women Voters of Washington, said people can start with voter pamphlets and candidates' websites. Her organization also has a voter guide at vote411.org. She said people should make plans for how they'll return their ballots before the 8 p.m. deadline on Nov. 5.

"We encourage people to mail their ballots in very early just to make sure they get there in time," she said, "but if somebody is voting at the last minute, there are drop boxes all over the state where people can take their ballots, and those are picked up at 8 o'clock and then they are counted."

Ballots returned in the mail and postmarked by Election Day at the latest will be counted. People can also still register to vote online until next Monday, Oct. 28. After that, they'll need to register in person at their local elections office, up until 8 p.m. on Nov. 5.

Cathy MacCaul, advocacy director for AARP Washington, said candidates and campaigns should focus on the issues that older Americans care about because they vote in the largest numbers every election.

"Housing, health care and financial security seem to be top of mind for older adults," she said, "and that's why our individuals who are running for office this election cycle - we want to know what steps will they be taking to support older adults as they age?"

MacCaul said policies that support Washington state's 820,000 unpaid family caregivers are also important this election.

"So that if they need to have respite care or have somebody come into their home to help care for the individual that they're trying to care for," she said, "so that they can have a break, or that they can go to work or that they can also interact with fun activities as well."

MacCaul said AARP Washington doesn't endorse candidates, but it is opposing Initiative 2124, as is the League of Women Voters of Washington. The measure would make the long-term care benefits program WA Cares optional for workers, which both organizations say would effectively end it because it would become financially unsustainable. Supporters say workers should be allowed to choose if they want to pay into WA Cares.