Help us make this collection as politically inclusive as possible! Please suggest an addition. (More about what we're looking for...)
7 results found
Generational divisions all too often mark political fault lines, but they can also catalyze mutual learning and democratic renewal. Civic intergenerationality is an approach to civic learning grounded in coming together across the life span to create a social and political reality that supports people of all ages. It operates under the assumption that all people are assets to our community, are capable of civic learning, and would benefit from it. By embracing the practice of civic intergenerationality, we can address America's ongoing civic crisis. We can create a community of lifelong, reciprocal learners that uplifts our youngest civic agents while leveraging the experiences and wisdom of older generations
Every 10 years, political districts at all levels of government are redrawn to make sure they are equal in population as required by the U.S. Constitution.1 Currently every state apportions representatives and draws congressional and state legislative districts on the basis of a state's total population.2 That is, when districts are drawn, all people living in the state, including children and noncitizens, are counted for the purposes of representation.However, some Republican political operatives and elected officials aim to unsettle this long-standing practice by excluding children and noncitizens from the population figures used to draw state legislative districts.3 Rather than count everyone, states would draw districts based only on the adult citizen population.Making such a break with current practice and precedent would be of dubious legality and would leave states vulnerable to a host of legal challenges. It also would have major practical implications for redistricting. This study looks at what such a change would mean for representation and the allocation of political power in the United States by focusing on its impact three demographically distinct states: Texas, Georgia, and Missouri.
This report looks at the upcoming redistricting cycle through the lens of four factors that will influence outcomes in each state: who controls map drawing; changes in the legal rules governing redistricting over the last decade; pressures from population and demographic shifts over the same period; and the potential impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the 2020 Census. In each state, the confluence of these factors will determine the risk of manipulated maps or whether, conversely, the redistricting process will produce maps that reflect what voters want, respond to shifts in public opinion, and protect the rights of communities of color.
President Trump recently claimed millions voted illegally in the 2016 election, and called for a "major investigation" into fraud in our election system. His remarks come after years of battles in the states over voting laws that make it harder for many citizens to participate in our elections. Yet the clamor over voter suppression should not obscure a fundamental shared truth: American elections should be secure and free of misconduct. This paper outlines a six-part agenda to target fraud risks as they actually exist -- without unduly disenfranchising eligible citizens.
Since 2010, outside spending in state elections has increased dramatically, according a report by the Brennan Center for Justice, a MacArthur grantee. In campaigns for state and local office, the difference between outside spending and that of candidates and campaigns is often even more porous than in federal elections. "After Citizens United: The Story in the States" investigates the prevention of non-candidate spending abuses in 15 states, revealing a pervasive set of poorly designed laws with a few states promoting tougher enforcement.
Precincts with fewer poll workers and voting machines and more minorities experienced longer voting lines in the 2012 presidential election, according to a study by the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU, a MacArthur grantee. The study, Election Day Long Lines: Resource Allocation, provides an in-depth look at the relationships between resource distribution, race, and the length of voting lines in Florida, Maryland, and South Carolina. The 10 South Carolina precincts with the longest wait times had, on average, 64 percent registered black voters, compared to 27 percent across the state. The 10 Maryland precincts with the fewest voting machines per voter had, on average, 19 percent Latino voting age citizens, compared to 7 percent across the state. The study also found many precincts did not comply with state requirements for allocating voting resources.
"In recent years, as the cost of judicial campaigns has soared, the boundaries that keep money and political pressure from interfering with the rule of law have become increasingly blurred", according to The New Politics of Judicial Elections, a MacArthur-supported report by Justice at Stake, the Brennan Center for Justice, and the National Institute on Money in State Politics. The report finds increased politicization and escalating spending in state judicial campaigns, as well as the growing role of special interest money. During the 2011-12 election cycle, many judicial races "seemed alarmingly indistinguishable from ordinary political campaigns" featuring everything from Super PACs and mudslinging attack ads to millions of dollars of candidate fundraising and independent spending.