The split-screen messaging of Ohio’s Frank LaRose, West Virginia’s Mac Warner and Missouri’s Jay Ashcroft shows just how deeply election lies have burrowed into the Republican Party, where more than half of voters believe Democrat Joe Biden was not legitimately elected president. Even election officials who tout running clean elections at home are routinely pushing for more voting restrictions and additional scrutiny on the process as they prepare to face GOP primary voters next year.

All three withdrew their states last month from the Electronic Registration Information Center, a bipartisan, multistate effort to ensure accurate voter lists. LaRose did so less than a month after calling the group “one of the best fraud-fighting tools that we have” and vowing to maintain Ohio’s membership. He defied backlash against the organization stoked by former President Donald Trump before relenting.

The three also have supported increased voter restrictions in their states — part of a national trend for Republicans that they say is intend to boost public confidence. Those bills impose new voter ID requirements, shrink windows for processing ballots or ease the ability to consolidate voting precincts.

For Republicans aspiring to higher office, “it’s kind of hard to skip some of these things if you want to succeed” in GOP primaries, said Nancy Martorano Miller, an associate professor of political science at the University of Dayton.

That includes appearing responsive to Republican voters’ belief in Trump’s false claims of a stolen 2020 presidential election at the same time they promote the job they’re doing in their own states.

“You’re secretary of state, so it’s your job to run elections and make sure they’re fraud-fee,” Martorano Miller said. “You’re kind of stuck between, ‘I need to show I’m doing these things to battle fraud,’ but at the same time, ‘if I make it seem like there’s too much fraud, it looks like I’m not doing my job.’”

Warner and Ashcroft have announced campaigns for governor while LaRose is considering a U.S. Senate run.

When he unveiled legislation in February aimed at standardizing election data, LaRose said it was all about providing transparency so voters would “have confidence in knowing that when the election is over, that the true voice of the people was heard.”

A couple weeks later, he was sitting on an elections panel titled “They Stole It From Us Legally” at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference.

LaRose’s spokesperson said the panel was renamed at the last minute, but the secretary used the opportunity to promote the integrity of Ohio elections.

“Voter fraud is exceedingly rare in Ohio because we take election security very seriously, aggressively pursue those who commit it and refer the potential crime to the attorney general and county prosecutors,” Rob Nichols said.

Similarly, Ashcroft has said Missouri has secure elections and praised Gov. Mike Parson for signing a package of election law changes last year that included a new photo ID requirement.

“Missouri voters are passionate about their right to vote,” he said. “This bill makes Missouri elections safer and more transparent, which instills confidence and trust.”

Then in January, Ashcroft hosted a meeting at his office with MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, a conspiracy theorist who travels the country fueling distrust in elections. The meeting alarmed some voting rights advocates in the state.

Warner has defended Trump’s false claims of a fraudulent 2020 election and demonstrated alongside “Stop the Steal” protesters, while also promoting the integrity of West Virginia’s elections.

He said in a recent interview that he is working to strike a balance between those on the right who believe the 2020 election was stolen and those on the left who argue “there’s nothing to see here.”

“The truth is obviously somewhere in the middle,” he said, while adding: “I will admit Biden won the election, but did he do it legitimately? Or did that happen outside the election laws that legislatures in certain states had put in place? That’s where I balk and say no.”

Warner said he would like to see an “after-action review” of the 2020 election, like those conducted in the military, to ease citizens’ minds and make elections better.

Trump and others have criticized the expansion of mail voting in 2020 in the COVID-19 pandemic, although there is no evidence of any widespread fraud and multiple reviews in the battleground states where Trump contested his loss have upheld the results. The House committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol found that Trump advisers and administration officials repeatedly debunked allegations of fraud in the weeks after the 2020 election, but Trump continued to push the lies, anyway.

In a recently settled defamation case against Fox News, a Delaware Superior Court judge ruled it was “CRYSTAL clear” that none of the claims repeatedly aired on the network about Dominion Voting Systems machines rigging votes against Trump was true.

Christopher McKnight Nichols, an Ohio State University professor of history, said it’s confusing for voters when secretaries of state claim elections they run are fair but then raise questions or hint at problems, without evidence, about elections elsewhere.

An earlier era of Republicans “absolutely would have been chagrined, embarrassed, and perhaps pushed out fellow Republicans who flip-flopped so radically, or promoted lies,” he said. “Their brand was the principled and consistent politician.”

In Ohio, LaRose spent years assuring the public that voter fraud represents a tiny fraction of Ohio’s cast ballots and that election tallies were nearly perfect. Then during his reelection campaign last year, he said Trump “is right to say that voter fraud is a serious problem” and blamed the mainstream media for “trying to minimize voter fraud to suit their narrative.”

In October, he joined a national Republican trend by opening a unit to investigate election law violations in Ohio, among other duties. He said that day that Ohio has a “strong national reputation for secure, accurate and accessible elections” — but added that anything short of “absolute confidence” in election integrity “weakens the very foundation of our democracy.”

The Tarrant County election commission voted unanimously Tuesday to accept the resignation. Tarrant County Judge Tim O’Hare said the next step of the process includes posting the job on the county website and advertising the job on various elections administration groups.

“The last time the county hired an elections administrator, there were not a lot of resumes that were sent in. Unfortunately, there were not a lot of qualified people,” O’Hare said.

In the resignation letter, which was made public last Monday, Garcia said differences with newly elected Judge O’Hare influenced his decision.

“Judge O’Hare, my formula to ‘a quality transparent election’ stands on respect and zero politics; compromising on these values is not an option for me. You made it clear in our last meeting that your formula is different, thus my decision to leave,” the letter read in part.

Speaking with reporters Tuesday, O’Hare was asked to clarify what differences there were in “formulas.”

O’Hare made two points.

“I don’t think it’s appropriate for an elections administrator to go out into a parking lot, take pictures of someone’s vehicle, send it to members of the press. I think that’s inappropriate,” he said.

He also referenced safety concerns that were brought forth by an election judge during early voting in the last general election.

“Nothing was done to help this person who feared for her safety and couldn’t control of the room,” he said. “The Republican party called Mr. Garcia and said, ‘hi, we got this going on. We need you to do something.’ The answer was, ‘what do you want me to do about it?’ That’s not OK. That’s not acceptable.”

Garcia did not return our request for comment Tuesday.

At the meeting, public comment was open for anyone who wished to speak on the resignation. Some commended Garcia’s work.

“He gave us faith in the process. He gave us encouragement. He was superb. It just breaks my heart that he felt he had to resign because he was going to be pressured to do things that were not up to his standard ethically,” one speaker said. “I frankly don’t think it’s going to be easy to recruit someone of his stature and standing once you run off someone who was really good.”

Another person said he was content with Garcia’s resignation, though he wanted to see him stay through November.

“Moving forward, what I’d like to our elections administrator is one that will follow the secretary of state’s laws, local laws, you know, our election laws to the T. No wavering from it,” he said.

O’Hare also weighed in on what he wants to see in the next election administrator.

“It’s got to be somebody who is a good listener. It’s got to be somebody that understands their role. Their role is to administer fair, secure, and honest elections,” he said. “This needs to be someone with some elections experience, with some experience with technology. We want someone who works well with others.”

He added, he did not want to do anything that would harm Garcia’s future employment prospects.

“At the end of the day, he chose to leave on his own. I didn’t threaten to fire him. I didn’t ask him to resign. I didn’t tell him I was going to bring him up before the election commission,” he said.

Garcia’s official last day is June 23.

Tarrant County Apr 18

Tarrant County Leaders Discuss Election Administrator Resignation, Property Tax Relief

Tarrant County Apr 17

Tarrant County Elections Chief Resigns, Says Differences With County Judge Influenced Decision

Biden, who would be 86 at the end of a second term, is betting his first-term legislative achievements and more than 50 years of experience in Washington will count for more than concerns over his age. He faces a smooth path to winning his party’s nomination, with no serious Democratic challengers. But he’s still set for a hard-fought struggle to retain the presidency in a bitterly divided nation.

In his first public appearance Tuesday since the announcement, Biden offered a preview of how he plans to navigate the dual roles of president and presidential candidate, using a speech to building trades union members to highlight his accomplishments and undercut his GOP rivals, while showing voters he remained focused on his day job. Greeted by a raucous crowd of building trades union members — a key base of Democratic support — with “Let’s Go Joe” chants, Biden touted the tens of thousands of construction jobs being created since he took office that are supported by the legislation he signed into law.

“We — you and I — together we’re turning things around and we’re doing it in a big way,” Biden said. “It’s time to finish the job. Finish the job.”

The official announcement, in a three-minute video, comes on the four-year anniversary of when Biden declared for the White House in 2019, promising to heal the “soul of the nation” amid the turbulent presidency of Donald Trump — a goal that has remained elusive.

“I said we are in a battle for the soul of America, and we still are,” Biden said. “The question we are facing is whether in the years ahead we have more freedom or less freedom. More rights or fewer.”

While the prospect of seeking reelection has been a given for most modern presidents, that’s not always been the case for Biden. A notable swath of Democratic voters has indicated they would prefer he not run, in part because of his age — concerns Biden has called “totally legitimate” but ones he did not address head-on in the launch video.

Yet few things have unified Democratic voters like the prospect of Trump returning to power. And Biden’s political standing within his party stabilized after Democrats notched a stronger-than-expected performance in last year’s midterm elections. The president is set to run again on the same themes that buoyed his party last fall, particularly on preserving access to abortion.

“Freedom. Personal freedom is fundamental to who we are as Americans. There’s nothing more important. Nothing more sacred,” Biden said in the launch video, depicting Republican extremists as trying to roll back access to abortion, cut Social Security, limit voting rights and ban books they disagree with. “Around the country, MAGA extremists are lining up to take those bedrock freedoms away.”

“This is not a time to be complacent,” Biden added. “That’s why I’m running for reelection.”

As the contours of the campaign begin to take shape, Biden plans to run on his record. He spent his first two years as president combating the coronavirus pandemic and pushing through major bills such as the bipartisan infrastructure package and legislation to promote high-tech manufacturing and climate measures. With Republicans now in control of the House, Biden has shifted his focus to implementing those massive laws and making sure voters credit him for the improvements.

The president also has multiple policy goals and unmet promises from his first campaign that he’s asking voters to give him another chance to fulfill.

“Let’s finish this job. I know we can,” Biden said in the video, repeating a mantra he said a dozen times during his State of the Union address in February, listing everything from passing a ban on assault-style weapons and lowering the cost of prescription drugs to codifying a national right to abortion after the Supreme Court’s ruling last year overturning Roe v. Wade.

Buoyed by the midterm results, Biden plans to continue to cast all Republicans as embracing what he calls “ultra-MAGA” politics — a reference to Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan — regardless of whether his predecessor ends up on the 2024 ballot.

Vice President Kamala Harris, who was featured prominently alongside Biden in the video, planned to attend a political rally on Tuesday evening in support of abortion access at Howard University in Washington, kicking off her efforts to support the reelect.

In the video, Biden speaks over brief clips and photographs of key moments in his presidency, snapshots of diverse Americans and flashes of outspoken Republican foes, including Trump, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia. He exhorts supporters that “this is our moment” to “defend democracy. Stand up for our personal freedoms. Stand up for the right to vote and our civil rights.”

Biden also plans to point to his work over the past two years shoring up American alliances, leading a global coalition to support Ukraine’s defenses against Russia’s invasion and returning the U.S. to the Paris climate accord. But public support in the U.S. for Ukraine has softened in recent months, and some voters question the tens of billions of dollars in military and economic assistance flowing to Kyiv.

The president faces lingering criticism over his administration’s chaotic 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan after nearly 20 years of war, which undercut the image of competence he aimed to portray, and he’s the target of GOP attacks over his immigration and economic policies.

As a candidate in 2020, Biden pitched voters on his familiarity with the halls of power in Washington and his relationships around the world. But even back then, he was acutely aware of voters’ concerns about his age.

“Look, I view myself as a bridge, not as anything else,” Biden said in March 2020, as he campaigned in Michigan with younger Democrats, including now-Vice President Kamala Harris, Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. “There’s an entire generation of leaders you saw stand behind me. They are the future of this country.”

Three years later, the president now 80, Biden allies say his time in office has demonstrated that he saw himself as more of a transformational than a transitional leader.

Still, many Democrats would prefer that Biden didn’t run again. A recent poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research shows just 47% of Democrats say they want him to seek a second term, up from 37% in February. And Biden’s verbal — and occasional physical — stumbles have become fodder for critics trying to cast him as unfit for office.

Biden, on multiple occasions, has brushed back concerns about his age, saying simply, “Watch me.”

During a routine physical in February, his physician, Dr. Kevin O’Connor, declared him “healthy, vigorous” and “fit” to handle his White House responsibilities.

Hours after Biden’s announcement, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre initially refused to say the president planned to serve all eight years if elected to a second term, later clarifying “I wanted to be sure that I didn’t go into 2024 more than is appropriate under the law. But I can confirm that if re-elected, @POTUS would serve all 8 years.”

Aides acknowledge that while some in his party might prefer an alternative to Biden, there is anything but consensus within their diverse coalition on who that might be. And they insist that when Biden is compared with whomever the GOP nominates, Democrats and independents will rally around Biden.

For now, the 76-year-old Trump is the favorite to emerge as the Republican nominee, creating the potential of a historic sequel to the bitterly fought 2020 campaign. But Trump faces significant hurdles of his own, including the designation of being the first former president to face criminal charges. The remaining GOP field is volatile, with DeSantis emerging as an early alternative to Trump. DeSantis’ stature is also in question, however, amid questions about his readiness to campaign outside of his increasingly Republican-leaning state.

To prevail again, Biden will need the alliance of young voters and Black voters — particularly women — along with blue-collar Midwesterners, moderates and disaffected Republicans who helped him win in 2020. He’ll have to again carry the so-called “blue wall” in the Upper Midwest, while protecting his position in Georgia and Arizona, longtime GOP strongholds he narrowly won last time.

Biden’s reelection bid comes as the nation weathers uncertain economic crosscurrents. Inflation is ticking down after hitting the highest rate in a generation, but unemployment is at a 50-year low, and the economy is showing signs of resilience despite Federal Reserve interest rate hikes.

“If voters let Biden ‘finish the job,’ inflation will continue to skyrocket, crime rates will rise, more fentanyl will cross our open borders, children will continue to be left behind, and American families will be worse off,” Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel said in a statement.

Presidents typically try to delay their reelection announcements to maintain the advantages of incumbency and skate above the political fray for as long as possible while their rivals trade jabs. But the leg up offered by being in the White House can be rickety — three of the last seven presidents have lost reelection, most recently Trump in 2020.

Biden’s announcement is roughly consistent with the timeline followed by then-President Barack Obama, who waited until April 2011 to declare for a second term and didn’t hold a reelection rally until May 2012. Trump launched his reelection bid on the day he was sworn in in 2017.

Biden is not expected to dramatically alter his day-to-day schedule as a candidate — at least not immediately — with aides believing his strongest political asset is showing the American people that he is governing. And if he follows the Obama playbook, he may not hold any formal campaign rallies until well into 2024.

On Tuesday, Biden named White House adviser Julie Chávez Rodríguez to serve as campaign manager and Quentin Fulks, who ran Sen. Raphael Warnock’s reelection campaign in Georgia last year, to serve as principal deputy campaign manager. The campaign co-chairs will be Reps. Lisa Blunt-Rochester, Jim Clyburn and Veronica Escobar; Sens. Chris Coons and Tammy Duckworth; entertainment mogul and Democratic mega-donor Jeffrey Katzenberg; and Whitmer.

Fresh off the campaign announcement, Biden is set to host South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol for a state visit at the White House and plans to meet with party donors in Washington later this week.

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

KEY ELECTION DATES IN DFW

Thursday, April 6 – Last day to register to vote
Monday, April 24 – Early voting begins
Tuesday, April 25 – Last day to apply for a ballot by mail
Tuesday, May 2 – Early voting ends
Saturday, May 6 – Election Day — ballots by mail must be postmarked by 7 p.m.
Thursday, May 11 – Last day to register to vote in any potential runoff
Tuesday, May 30 – Last day to apply for a ballot by mail for any potential runoff
Saturday, June 10 – Likely date of any potential runoff

EARLY VOTING SCHEDULE

• Collin County early voting schedule — Collin County voters may vote at any early voting location — see a list of locations here including wait times. The wait times at each location are marked in either green, yellow or red, indicating wait times of 20 minutes or less, 40 minutes or less, and more than 40 minutes, respectively.
  Early Voting Schedule
  April 24-29: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
  April 30: No early voting hours
  May 1-2: 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
  On May 6, Election Day, polling locations will be open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. **More information, sample ballots, etc., available at Collin County Elections
  
• Dallas County early voting schedule — Dallas County voters may vote at any early voting location — see a list of locations here including wait times. The wait times at each polling place in green, yellow, and red, indicate wait times of 20 minutes or less, 40 minutes or less, or more than 40 minutes, respectively.
  Early Voting Schedule
  April 24-29: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
  April 30: Noon to 6 p.m.
  May 1-2: 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
  On May 6, Election Day, polling locations will be open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. **More information, sample ballots, etc., available at Dallas County Elections
• Denton County early voting schedule — Denton County voters may vote at any early voting location — see a list of locations here.
  Early Voting Schedule
  April 24-29: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
  April 30: 11 a.m. to 5 p.m.
  May 1-2: 7 a.m. to 7 a.m.
  On May 6, Election Day, polling locations will be open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. **More information, sample ballots, etc., available at Denton County Elections
  
• Tarrant County early voting schedule (Tarrant County voters may vote at any early voting location — see a list of locations here or see a map here including wait times. The wait times are shown in five colors, green, yellow, orange, red, and blue. Green indicates 0-29 minutes, yellow 30-44 minutes, orange 45-59 minutes, red more than 60 minutes and blue indicates no wait time data available.
  Early Voting Schedule
  April 24-28: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
  April 29: 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
  April 30: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  May 1-2: 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
  On May 6, Election Day, polling locations will be open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. **More information, sample ballots, etc., available at Tarrant County Elections
  
• Other County Election Pages: Anderson, Bosque, Comanche, Cooke, Delta, Ellis, Erath, Fannin, Freestone, Hamilton, Henderson, Hill, Hood, Hopkins, Hunt, Jack, Johnson, Kaufman, Lamar, Navarro, Palo Pinto, Parker, Rains, Red River, Rockwall, Somervell, Van Zandt, Wise

HOW TO REGISTER/AM I REGISTERED?

The last day to register to vote in the state of Texas for this election was Thursday, April 6. You can check your voter status at VoteTexas.gov. If you have not yet registered you will not be able to vote in this election, but you can still register to vote in future elections by printing out an application online and then mailing it to your county election office. Also, Texans can now register to vote online, but only when they renew or update their driver’s licenses.

WHERE DO I VOTE IN NORTH TEXAS?

Voters in 17 North Texas counties are approved to use the Countywide Polling Place Program for the May 6 election, which means they can vote at any polling location they like. Those counties that are CPPP approved are: Collin, Dallas, Ellis, Erath, Grayson, Henderson, Hood, Hopkins, Jack, Kaufman, Montague, Navarro, Palo Pinto, Parker, Rockwall, Somervell, and Tarrant. See a full state list of approved CPPP counties here. Voters in all other counties must vote at their designated precinct on Election Day. Lists of voting/precinct locations can be found on County Election Pages here: Anderson, Bosque, Comanche, Collin, Cooke, Dallas, Delta, Denton, Ellis, Erath, Fannin, Freestone, Hamilton, Henderson, Hill, Hood, Hopkins, Hunt, Jack, Johnson, Kaufman, Lamar, Navarro, Palo Pinto, Parker, Rains, Red River, Rockwall, Somervell, Tarrant, Van Zandt, Wise. In larger counties, wait times may be posted on the county election website.

WHAT IDENTIFICATION DO I NEED TO VOTE?

You must present one of the following forms of photo ID when voting in person:

• Texas driver’s license issued by the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS)
• Texas Election Identification Certificate (EIC) issued by DPS
• Texas personal identification card issued by DPS
• Texas Handgun License issued by DPS
• A United States Military Identification card containing the person’s photograph
• A United States Citizenship Certificate containing the person’s photograph
• A United States Passport (book or card)

FREE RIDES TO THE POLLS

DART
DART is providing free transportation to polling locations for the May 6 election. Voters can ride at no charge on all DART buses, trains, GoLink, the Dallas Streetcar, Paratransit Services and the TRE between EBJ Union Station and CentrePort/DFW Airport Station. Customers need to show a valid voter registration card to ride for free on the day of the election. GoLink riders can use promo code VOTE23 at checkout for a complimentary Adult Local Day Pass in the DART GoPass app on May 6. You can learn more at dart.org/vote.

TRINITY METRO
Throughout early voting and on Tuesday, May 6, Fort Worth residents can catch a free ride to the polls on Trinity Metro services to cast votes in the mayoral and city council member election. Passengers may ride for free to polling locations during early voting from April 24-May 2 and on Election Day, May 6, by showing their voter registration card or current Texas ID. Riders may choose from Trinity Metro’s bus routes, ZIPZONE on-demand rideshare services or ACCESS paratransit for voting. To use Trinity Metro ZIPZONE, download the ZIPZONE app and book your ride. Free ZIPZONE rides will be offered to or from any identified voter center location within a zone. For questions about bus routes, ZIPZONE or ACCESS paratransit rides to your polling place, call Trinity Metro at 817-215-8600.

STAR TRANSIT
STAR Transit is offering free, round-trip rides to local polling places for early voting, encouraging all eligible voters to participate. Free service for early voting continues weekdays through Tuesday, May 2, across the entire STAR Transit service area. In Mesquite and Balch Springs only, free service is available for early voting Saturday, April 29, and for Election Day Saturday, May 6. All STAR Transit services are available, including Demand Response, Fixed Routes, and STARNow. To ride free on STARNow, use the code Vote2023. Rides must be in the STAR Transit service area or STARNow zone and are based on availability. Voters must tell bus operators and reservationists they are riding to and from the polls. To schedule a free ride to vote, call STAR Transit no less than 30 minutes in advance of the desired trip. Scheduling agents are available during normal business hours, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday–Friday at (877) 631-5278. To book a STARNow ride, use the STARNow app, which can be downloaded free from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store. Se Habla Español.

ABSENTEE BALLOTS IN TEXAS

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) dramatically reduced the number of locations across the state that can accept a handed-in absentee ballot to ensure that poll watchers had adequate access to each location. Beginning in October 2020, mail ballots delivered in person by eligible voters can only be delivered to one location in each Texas county — that location is designated by each county’s early voting clerk. You may only hand-deliver your own envelope and not for another individual and you must bring ID.

To qualify for a mail-in ballot in Texas, voters must be: away from their county of residence on Election Day and during the early-voting period; sick or disabled; confined in jail but otherwise eligible to vote; or 65 years old or more. Absentee voters must also include their Texas driver’s license number, Texas DPS-issued ICN or ECN, or the last four digits of their Social Security number, whichever matches their voter record, or a statement that they have not been issued any of those forms of ID.

The last day to apply for an Absentee Ballot is April 24; Absentee ballots may be turned-in in person at any time as long as it’s received by 7 p.m. on Election Day. Absentee ballots that are mailed in must be postmarked by Election Day.

• In Tarrant County, absentee ballots can be dropped off in person at the Tarrant County Elections Administration office at 2700 Premier Street, during regular business hours. The ballot may also be hand-delivered on Election Day between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. You may only hand-deliver your own envelope and not for another individual and you must bring ID. Ballots may also be delivered to the clerk via a common or contract carrier. Read more here.
• In Dallas County, absentee ballots can be dropped off at the Early Voting Clerk’s Office at 1520 Round Table Drive. A full schedule, with extended hours, is available on DallasCountyVotes.org. You may only hand-deliver your own envelope and not for another individual and you must bring ID. Ballots may also be delivered to the clerk via a common or contract carrier.
• In Denton County, absentee ballots can be dropped off at the Early Voting Clerk’s Office at 701 Kimberly Drive. Ballots may be hand-delivered during regular business hours. You may only hand-deliver your own envelope and not for another individual and you must bring ID. Ballots may also be delivered to the clerk via a common or contract carrier.  Read more here.
• In Collin County, absentee ballots can be dropped off at the Elections Department at 2010 Redbud Boulevard, Suite 102 during regular business hours. More information can be found here. You may only hand-deliver your own envelope and not for another individual and you must bring ID. Ballots may also be delivered to the clerk via a common or contract carrier.

WHAT’S ON MY BALLOT? SEE SAMPLE BALLOTS IN TEXAS

Some key races and bond and city props are below. To see sample ballots for your specific county, you’ll need to visit your county election webpage (links are below).

County Election Pages: Anderson, Bosque, Comanche, Collin, Cooke, Dallas, Delta, Denton, Ellis, Erath, Fannin, Freestone, Hamilton, Henderson, Hill, Hood, Hopkins, Hunt, Jack, Johnson, Kaufman, Lamar, Navarro, Palo Pinto, Parker, Rains, Red River, Rockwall, Somervell, Tarrant, Van Zandt, Wise

KEY MAYORAL RACES IN NORTH TEXAS

Key races in this election will be listed below. It is not a comprehensive list of all races and not all races will appear on all ballots. The comprehensive list of all races will be added and linked from this page in the days leading up to Election Day.

Addison Mayor
Bruce Arfsten
JP Vercollone

Arlington Mayor
Amy Cearnal
Jim Ross Incumbent

Balch Springs Mayor
Wanda Mack Adams
Carrie F. Gordon Incumbent

Burleson Mayor
Chris Fletcher Incumbent
Ronnie Johnson

Carrollton Mayor
Steve Babick Incumbent
Young Sung
Adam Polter

Celina Mayor
Ryan Tubbs
Sean Terry Incumbent

Corinth Mayor
Lindsey Rayl
Bill Heidemann Incumbent

Dallas Mayor
Eric Johnson Incumbent
Kendal Richardson Write-in candidate

Double Oak Mayor
Patrick Johnson
Jean Hillyer

Farmers Branch Mayor
Terry Lynne
Jaime Rivas

Fort Worth Mayor
Mattie Parker Incumbent
Alyson Kennedy
Jennifer Castillo
Adrian Devine Smith
Kenneth Bowens, Jr.

Frisco Mayor
Jonathan David Spencer
Mark Piland
Jeff Cheney Incumbent

Garland Mayor
Roel G. Garcia
Scott LeMay Incumbent

Haltom City Mayor
An Truong Incumbent
Cindy Sturgeon
Jeff Barlett

Haslet Mayor
Gary Hulsey Incumbent
Patricia Hilborn

Justin Mayor
James Clark
Chrissa Hartle

Lakeside Mayor
Wesley Hearn
Patrick Jacob Incumbent

Ponder Mayor
John Bassler
Matthew Poole Incumbent

Richardson Mayor
Bob Dubey
Janet DePuy

River Oaks Mayor
Darren Houk
Dan Dagel

Seagoville Mayor
Lackey Stepper Sebastian
Dennis K. Childress Incumbent

Trophy Club Mayor
Greg Lamont
Jeannette Tiffany Write-in candidate

SCHOOL BOND PROPOSITIONS IN NORTH TEXAS

Aledo ISD – Prop A – $124 million for school facilities.

Carrollton-Farmers Branch ISD – Prop A – $716 million for school facilities.

Cedar Hill ISD – Prop A – $208 million for school facilities.

Coppell ISD – Props A-D – $321 million for school facilities.

Crowley ISD – Prop A-C – $1.17 billion for school facilities.

Denton ISD – Props A-C – $1.43 billion for school facilities.

Garland ISD – Props A-C – $1.3 billion for school facilities.

Godley ISD – Prop A – $889 million for school facilities.

Irving ISD – Props A-E – $702 million for school facilities.

Kennedale ISD – Props A-E $106 million for school facilities.

Northwest ISD – Props A-C – $2 billion for school facilities.

Princeton ISD – Bond Prop A – $797 million for school facilities.

Slidell ISD – Bond Prop A – $26 million for school facilities.

NORTH TEXAS CITY PROPOSITIONS

Arlington – Props A-E – $278 million for street improvements, parks, public safety and library facilities.

Flower Mound – Prop A – $7.5 million for parks and recreation facilities.

Frisco – Props A-E – $473 million for facilities, roads, parks, parking garage.

McKinney – Prop A – $200 million airport terminal.

Northlake – Prop A – Add 2% hotel tax and use 1/8th cent of existing sales tax for the development of a sports venue project.

Parker – Prop A – $8.6 million municipal facility.

Richardson – Prop A – $46 million for a new City Hall.

Rowlett – Props A-C – $76 million for public safety facilities, animal shelter and parks.

Saginaw – Prop A – Reauthorize the local sales and use tax at 1/8 of 1% to provide revenue for street repair.

HAS MY BALLOT BEEN RECEIVED?

If you would like to verify if your mail-in or in-person ballot has been received you can verify that information at txballot.org. Ballots that were mailed in may take a few days to show up on the website.

LONE STAR POLITICS

early voting Apr 23

Early Voting in May 6 Election Begins

early voting Apr 23

Polls Open Monday Morning for Early Voting

lone star politics Apr 23

Lone Star Politics: What's on the Ballot on May 6

WHAT IS A POLL WATCHER?

A poll watcher is a person appointed to observe the conduct of an election on behalf of a candidate, political party or the proponents or opponents of a particular measure. Their role in an election is established by Chapter 33 of the Texas Election Code and they must adhere to certain rules at polling locations. The Poll Watcher’s Guide from the Texas Secretary of State can be found here.

The primary duty of a watcher is to observe the conduct of the election at the location where the watcher has been appointed. A watcher may point out to an election judge or clerk any observed irregularity or violation of the Texas Election Code. However, if the clerk refers the watcher to the judge, the watcher may not discuss the matter further with the clerk unless the presiding judge invites the discussion.

• A poll watcher must have a certificate of appointment that includes their name, address, information on who appointed them and the precinct in which they are permitted to serve.
• Poll watchers cannot be current candidates or elected officials.
• Poll watchers are not allowed to engage or talk to voters in any manner about the election.
• No more than two poll watchers may be at any particular polling place at any given time.
• Poll watchers cannot talk with an election officer regarding the election except to call attention to an irregularity or violation.
• The watcher cannot reveal information about voters or the votes before the polls close or face possible criminal charges.
• A poll watcher can witness the installation of voting equipment and observe the securing of equipment before the election.
• A poll watcher can observe any activity conducted at the location and sit or stand conveniently near the election officials to observe the election activities, but they are not allowed to go into voting booths with voters while they are marking their ballot.
• Poll watchers are permitted to observe assistance given to voters by election officials and to inspect the ballot before it’s deposited in the ballot box to determine if it was prepared in accordance with the voter’s wishes.
• Poll watchers are permitted to inspect the returns and other records prepared by election officials. They are also allowed to observe the tallying and counting of votes to verify that they are tallied and read correctly.
• Poll watchers may also be on the lookout for illegal activities, including but not limited to, electioneering, loitering, voters attempting to vote without identification, and others attempting to coerce or bribe voters.

STRAIGHT-TICKET VOTING

Most states don’t offer straight-ticket voting. Texas offered straight-ticket voting for decades, but Gov. Greg Abbott (R) signed a law removing the option in 2020. That measure was pushed through by a GOP-controlled Legislature that argued ending the practice would encourage voters to cast better-informed ballots on Election Day.

Democrats challenged the change in court, citing long lines on Super Tuesday where some Houston voters waited more than an hour to vote. They said ending straight-ticket voting disproportionately hurt Black and Latino voters in big urban counties, where longer ballots mean longer wait times.

In a decision dated Wednesday, the panel found software developer Robert Zeidman had won Lindell’s 2021 contest challenging experts to prove that data he had was not from the 2020 election, and directed the MyPillow founder to pay him the reward money he’d promised in the next 30 days.

FBI Sep 14, 2022

MyPillow Exec Mike Lindell Says FBI Agents Seized His Cellphone in Hardee's Drive-Thru Line

Donald Trump Dec 16, 2021

MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell Says He Spent $25 Million to Push False Pro-Trump Election Claims: ‘I Will Spend Whatever It Takes'

Lindell told NBC News on Thursday that the ruling was “a horrible, wrong decision.”

The contest took place in August 2021 at a cyber symposium that Lindell — an outspoken election denier and conspiracy theorist — was hosting in Sioux Falls, South Dakota.

As part of the symposium, Lindell announced a contest called the “Prove Mike Wrong Challenge” in which participants were asked to find proof that his cyber data was not valid data from the November election, the ruling said. The announcement said: “For the people who find the evidence, 5 million is their reward.”

Read the full story on NBCNews.com here.

Crystal Mason was convicted in 2018 and sentenced to five years behind bars for voting in Tarrant County in the 2016 election when she was ineligible.

As her case went back and forth through appellate courts, so too has the issue of illegal voting bounced back and forth among Texas lawmakers.

A crowd of supporters went with Mason Tuesday to the 2^nd Court of Appeals in Fort Worth to help send a message to the three-judge panel hearing arguments in her case.

“Number one, that our votes matter. And number two, that we will not stand for any type of voter suppression or intimidation. Crystal is a symbol as far as we’re concerned,” said Pastor Frederick Haynes of Friendship West Baptist Church in Dallas.

Mason was on supervised release from a previous federal tax law violation when she cast a provisional ballot that was never counted in the 2016 election.

She received help from a poll worker.

“That’s what blew my mind when I first heard about this. If a poll worker didn’t know better, how could she?” said Barbara Arnwine with the Transformative Justice Coalition from Washington, D.C.

The state’s highest Texas Court of Criminal Appeals declined several points of Mason’s appeal but sent the case back to the lower level appeals court in Fort Worth on that one remaining question: Did Mason actually know it was illegal to cast that ballot in 2016?

Attorney Sophia Lin Lakin with the American Civil Liberties Union in New York City argued that point on Mason’s behalf Tuesday.

“She did not know. She had nothing to gain from completing that provisional ballot. There’s no reason whatsoever she would have done that,” Lakin said.

An assistant Tarrant County District Attorney argued the opposite position for the state. He said language in the provisional ballot applications Mason signed said who is ineligible and that Mason admitted in her 2018 testimony that she knew the law did forbid her voting.

But Mason’s lawyers say she did not see any such prohibition when she voted in 2016.

In courtroom questioning of the lawyers, Judge J. Wade Birdwell seemed to agree with Mason’s position.

“There’s nothing in this language that actually tells her she is ineligible,” Birdwell said.

The prosecutor declined further comment as he left the courtroom.

“I think the judges were attempting to be fair,” Haynes said.

Mason had little to say to reporters as she left except that it has been a long struggle.

Two years ago Texas lawmakers clarified what it takes to prove that a voter knows voting is illegal and they relaxed penalties. In the 2023 session, a bill is pending to make punishment tougher again.

Texas State Senator Bryan Hughes, a Republican from Mineola, spoke about it in February with NBC 5.

“We just want to make sure the laws do their job and deter crime and hold people accountable when they do break the law,” Hughes said.

Barbara Arnwine said Mason’s case has captivated her national organization from the beginning.

“We feel this woman has been persecuted,” Arnwine said.

It could be several months before the panel issues a ruling. And that is also subject to appeal by either side back to the highest court.

Fort Worth Dec 1, 2020

Legal Team of Fort Worth Woman Convicted of Voting Illegally Seeks Review By Highest Criminal Court in Texas

Fort Worth May 12, 2022

Lower Court Ordered to Take a New Look at Crystal Mason Voter Fraud Case

texas Mar 30, 2018

Texas Woman Sentenced to 5 Years for Voting Illegally

The stunning settlement emerged just as opening statements were supposed to begin, abruptly ending a case that had embarrassed Fox News over several months and raised the possibility that network founder Rupert Murdoch and stars such as Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity would have to testify publicly.

“The truth matters. Lies have consequences,” Dominion lawyer Justin Nelson told reporters outside a Delaware courthouse after Superior Court Judge Eric Davis announced the deal.

Outside of the $787.5 million promised to Colorado-based Dominion, it was unclear what other consequences Fox would face. Fox acknowledged in a statement “the court’s rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false,” but no apology was offered.

“We are hopeful that our decision to resolve this dispute with Dominion amicably, instead of the acrimony of a divisive trial, allows the country to move forward from these issues,” Fox said. Its lawyers and representatives offered no other comment or details about the settlement.

Asked by a reporter whether there was “anything to this other than money,” Dominion CEO John Poulos did not answer.

The deal is a significant amount of money even for a company the size of Fox. It represents about one-quarter of the $2.96 billion the company reported earning last year before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization — a figure often used to approximate a company’s cash flow.

The settlement also follows a $965 million judgment issued against Alex Jones by a Connecticut jury in 2022 for spreading false conspiracy theories about the Sandy Hook school massacre.

Coupled with other lawsuits in the pipeline, the agreement shows there is a real financial risk for conservative media that traffic in conspiracy theories. What remains unknown is how much of a deterrent this will be. Even as the Dominion case loomed this spring, Fox’s Tucker Carlson aired his alternate theories about what happened at the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.

Dominion had sued Fox for $1.6 billion, arguing that the top-rated news outlet had damaged the company’s reputation by peddling phony conspiracy theories that claimed its equipment switched votes from former President Donald Trump to Democrat Joe Biden. Davis, in an earlier ruling, said it was “CRYSTAL clear” that none of the allegations about Dominion aired on Fox by Trump allies were true.

Dominion set out to prove in the lawsuit that Fox acted with malice in airing allegations that it knew to be false, or with “reckless disregard” for the truth. It presented volumes of internal emails and text messages that showed Fox executives and personalities saying they knew the accusations were untrue, even as the falsehoods were aired on programs hosted by Maria Bartiromo, Lou Dobbs and Jeannine Pirro.

Records released as part of the lawsuit showed that Fox aired the claims in part to win back viewers who were fleeing the network after it correctly called hotly contested Arizona for Democrat Joe Biden on election night. One Fox Corp. vice president called them “MIND BLOWINGLY NUTS.”

During a deposition, Murdoch testified that he believed the 2020 election was fair and had not been stolen from Trump.

“Fox knew the truth,” Dominion argued in court papers. “It knew the allegations against Dominion were ‘outlandish’ and ‘crazy’ and ‘ludicrous’ and ‘nuts.’ Yet it used the power and influence of its platform to promote that false story.”

Several First Amendment experts said Dominion’s case was among the strongest they had ever seen. But there was real doubt about whether Dominion would be able to prove to a jury that people in a decision-making capacity at Fox could be held responsible for the network’s actions.

Dominion’s Nelson called the settlement “a tremendous victory” and noted that there are six more lawsuits pending regarding election claims.

Also in the News

news Mar 28

Dominion Wants Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Other Fox News Hosts to Testify at Trial

Donald Trump Mar 21

Fox News Producer Claims Network Coerced Her to Give Misleading Testimony in Dominion Libel Case

“We settled because it was about accountability,” Nelson said in an interview. “Our goals were to make sure that there was accountability for the lies, and to try to make our client right. And we accomplished both goals.”

It’s hard to tell what the deal will mean financially for Dominion. The company would not provide its most recent earnings, saying the figures were not public.

In the weeks leading up to the trial, Davis significantly narrowed Fox’s potential line of defense, including nixing the network’s argument that it was merely airing newsworthy allegations. Newsworthiness is not a defense against defamation, he said.

In a March 31 ruling, he pointedly called out the network for airing falsehoods while noting that bogus election claims still persist more than two years after Trump lost his bid for reelection.

“The statements at issue were dramatically different than the truth,” Davis said in that ruling. “In fact, although it cannot be attributed directly to Fox’s statements, it is noteworthy that some Americans still believe the election was rigged.”

In its defense, Fox said it was obligated to report on a president who claimed that he had been cheated out of reelection.

“We never reported those to be true,” Fox lawyer Erin Murphy said. “All we ever did was provide viewers the true fact that these were allegations that were being made.”

Dominion had sued both Fox News and its parent, Fox Corp, and said its business had been significantly damaged. Fox said the company grossly overestimated its losses, before agreeing to pay about half of what Dominion had asked for.

In a 1964 case involving The New York Times, the U.S. Supreme Court limited the ability of public figures to sue for defamation. The court ruled that plaintiffs needed to prove that news outlets published or aired false material with “actual malice” — knowing such material was false or acting with a “reckless disregard” for whether or not it was true.

That has provided news organizations with stout protection against libel judgments. Yet the nearly six-decade legal standard has come under attack by some conservatives in recent years, including Trump and Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, who have argued for making it easier to win a libel case.

“The larger importance of the settlement … is that the high level of protection for news media in a defamation case remains intact from now,” said Doreen Weisenhaus, an instructor of media law at Northwestern University.

In documents released in recent months, Fox executives and anchors discussed how not to alienate the audience, many of whom believed Trump’s claims of fraud despite no evidence to back them up. Fox’s Tucker Carlson suggested a news reporter be fired for tweeting a fact check debunking the fraud claims.

Some of the exhibits were simply embarrassing, such as scornful behind-the-scenes opinions about Trump, whose supporters form the core of the network’s viewers. Text exchanges revealed as part of the lawsuit show Carlson declaring, “I hate him passionately,” and saying that “we are very, very close to being able to ignore Trump most nights.”

Fox News announced the settlement on Neil Cavuto’s afternoon news show. “It’s a done deal,” he said. “It’s a settlement and for at least Fox, it appears to be over.”

But Fox’s legal problems may not be over. It still faces a defamation lawsuit from another voting technology company, Smartmatic. Its lawyer, Erik Connolly, said Tuesday that “Dominion’s litigation exposed some of the misconduct and damage caused by Fox’s disinformation campaign. Smartmatic will expose the rest.” ___ Associated Press writers Jennifer Peltz in New York and Nicholas Riccardi in Denver contributed to this report.

In a resignation letter obtained by NBC 5 Monday, Heider Garcia said differences with newly elected Judge Tim O’Hare influenced his decision.

Come June 23, Garcia will step down from his position as Tarrant County Elections Administrator, according to a resignation letter made public Monday afternoon.

In the letter addressed to Tarrant County Judge Tim O’Hare and County Administrator GK Maenius, Garcia thanked Maenius for his leadership and support.

Garcia addressed O’Hare as well, citing differences between the two of them on what he called a “formula” for “respect and zero politics.”

His letter read in part:

“Judge O’Hare, my formula to ‘a quality transparent election’ stands on respect and zero politics; compromising on these values is not an option for me. You made it clear in our last meeting that your formula is different, thus my decision to leave.”

Allison Campolo, President of the Tarrant County Democratic Party, said she had no warning of Garcia’s decision.

“I definitely did not see it coming and we are definitely sad,” Campolo said.

She said she did speak with Garcia briefly after getting word of his resignation. She told NBC 5 he did not say much more to her than what was already in the resignation letter.

“He really didn’t say much, just that he’s no longer able to work with Judge Tim O’Hare and that was it,” she said.

She said her message to Tarrant County voters during this transition is to remain engaged.

“We need folks to keep their eyes open, their ears open for who Judge O’Hare’s picks might be,” said Campolo.

Campolo released a statement following the news. The statement read in part:

“Garcia has provided transparency in voting processes and has communicated those voting procedures clearly to the public.”

O’Hare, a Republican, won the Nov. 8 election, defeating Democrat Deborah Peoples.

In February, O’Hare formed an Election Integrity Task Force along with Tarrant County Sheriff Bill Waybourn and District Attorney Phil Sorrells that was dedicated to investigating voter fraud. However, a 2020 audit of the Tarrant County process showed no substantial evidence of widespread fraud.

In a statement to NBC 5, O’Hare did not directly address Garcia’s claim about a difference in values but said he will soon start the process of hiring a new administrator.

O’Hare’s statement reads in part:

“I want nothing more than quality, transparent elections in Tarrant County… Mr. Garcia voluntarily resigned his position, and I wish him well in his future endeavors.”

Garcia’s remaining time in the position will allow him to oversee the May 6 joint elections and any potential runoffs. Calls to Garcia for additional comment have gone unanswered.

O’Hare says he will call a meeting with the County Elections Commission in the coming days to discuss next steps.

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

Superior Court Judge Eric Davis suggested the sides try to mediate their dispute, according to a person close to Fox who was not authorized to speak publicly about the status of the lawsuit. Attorneys for both sides who appeared in court Monday declined to answer reporters’ questions about the delay, as did representatives for both companies.

Davis gave no explanation for delaying the trial’s start until Tuesday, although he did note that delays are common and built into the schedule. Jury selection and opening statements were planned for the first day in a trial that, if it happens, is expected to last six weeks.

“This is not a press conference,” Davis said during Monday’s brief hearing. “I don’t do that.”

US & World News

news Apr 17

McCarthy Pledges a Vote on One-Year Debt Limit Hike – Without Clear GOP Support

cancer Apr 17

Risk of Death from Melanoma Drops With Personalized mRNA Vaccine, Study Shows

A trial would force Fox to answer for its actions in the weeks after the 2020 presidential election and litigate denial about the outcome of the race in general. The case centers on whether Fox defamed Denver-based Dominion Voting Systems by spreading false claims that the company rigged the election against then-President Donald Trump.

A settlement is certainly a possibility in a trial that carries risks for both sides. Fox already has been embarrassed by revelations that some of its executives and on-air personalities did not believe fraud claims that the network spread on the air, and it doesn’t want to see 92-year-old founder Rupert Murdoch testify. Dominion could miss a big payday if a jury rules against it.

Not everyone wants the case to go away quietly, however.

“PLEASE Dominion — Do not settle with Fox! You’re about to prove something very big,” tweeted Gretchen Carlson, the former Fox anchor whose accusations of sexual misconduct by former Fox chief Roger Ailes led to his downfall in 2016.

Fox, meanwhile, paid for a full-page advertisement in The New York Times on Monday headlined “Trusted Now. More Than Ever.”

Dozens of journalists gathered at the courthouse in downtown Wilmington, some before dawn, for a hearing that lasted about five minutes. The courtyard in front of the court building was full of TV crews ready to do live shots.

Besides its implications for Fox, the case is being watched carefully by journalists for what it could mean for libel law. Defamation is generally hard to prove, since it requires a finding that journalists published information they knew to be false, or with a reckless disregard for the truth.

In the News

electric vehicles Apr 17

See the EVs Eligible for Tax Credits – and Why Most Aren't

Kansas City Apr 17

Kansas City Community Calls for Justice After 16-Year-Old Shot

Some First Amendment lawyers say Dominion’s lawsuit presents a powerful case, given the doubt expressed within Fox about the fraud allegations. Fox says Dominion can’t prove that the people with such doubts were in position to affect what was said on the air about the company.

Even before a jury hears the case, Davis has made some rulings in Dominion’s favor, including stating that the allegations of election fraud made against the company were clearly false. That means the issue will not have to be litigated in the trial.

___

Associated Press writer Eric Tucker in Washington contributed to this report.

The trial, which has drawn international interest, had been scheduled to start Monday morning with jury selection and opening statements.

The case centers on whether Fox defamed Dominion Voting Systems by spreading false claims that the company rigged the 2020 presidential election to prevent former President Donald Trump’s reelection. Records produced as part of the lawsuit show that many of the network’s hosts and executives didn’t believe the allegations but aired them, anyway.

Claire Bischoff, a Dominion spokesperson, said the company would have no comment on the trial delay. Representatives for Fox News and its parent company, Fox Corp., the entities Dominion is suing, did not immediately return requests for comment. In his statement, Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis said only that the trial, including jury selection, would be continued until Tuesday and that he would announce the delay in court on Monday.

That’s when Fox News executives and the network’s star hosts were scheduled to begin answering for their role in spreading doubt about the 2020 presidential election and creating the gaping wound that remains in America’s democracy.

Jurors hearing the $1.6 billion lawsuit filed against Fox by Dominion Voting Systems must answer a specific question: Did Fox defame the voting machine company by airing bogus stories alleging that the election was rigged against then-President Donald Trump, even as many at the network privately doubted the false claims being pushed by Trump and his allies?

Yet the broader context looms large. A trial would test press freedom and the reputation of conservatives’ favorite news source. It also would illuminate the flow of misinformation that helped spark the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol and continues to fuel Trump’s hopes to regain power in 2024.

Fox News stars Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity and founder Rupert Murdoch are among the people who had been expected to testify.

Barring a settlement, opening statements are now scheduled for Tuesday.

“This is Christmas Eve for defamation scholars,” said RonNell Andersen Jones, a University of Utah law professor.

If the trial were a sporting event, Fox News would be taking the field on a losing streak, with key players injured and having just alienated the referee. Pretrial court rulings and embarrassing revelations about its biggest names have Fox on its heels.

Court papers released over the past two months show Fox executives, producers and personalities privately disbelieved Trump’s claims of a fraudulent election. But Dominion says Fox News was afraid of alienating its audience with the truth, particularly after many viewers were angered by the network’s decision to declare Democrat Joe Biden the winner in Arizona on election night in November 2020.

Read More

news Apr 16

Fox News Apologizes to Judge in Defamation Case for Failing to Disclose Rupert Murdoch's Role at the Network

news Mar 28

Dominion Wants Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Other Fox News Hosts to Testify at Trial

Some rulings by the judge have eased Dominion’s path. In a summary judgment, Davis said it was “CRYSTAL clear” that fraud allegations against the company were false. That means trial time won’t have to be spent disproving them at a time when millions of Republicans continue to doubt the 2020 results.

Davis said it also is clear that Dominion’s reputation was damaged, but that it would be up to a jury to decide whether Fox acted with “actual malice” — the legal standard — and, if so, what that’s worth financially.

Fox witnesses would likely testify that they thought the allegations against Dominion were newsworthy, but Davis made it clear that’s not a defense against defamation.

New York law protects news outlets from defamation for expressions of opinion. But Davis methodically went through 20 different times on Fox when allegations against Dominion were discussed, ruling that all of them were fully or partly considered statements of fact, and fair game for a potential libel finding.

“A lawsuit is a little bit like hitting a home run,” said Cary Coglianese, law professor at the University of Pennsylvania. “You have to go through all of the bases to get there.” The judge’s rulings “basically give Dominion a spot at third base, and all they have to do is come home to win it.”

Both Fox and Dominion are incorporated in Delaware, though Fox News is headquartered in New York and Dominion is based in Denver.

Fox angered Davis this past week when the judge said the network’s lawyers delayed producing evidence and were not forthcoming in revealing Murdoch’s role at Fox News. A Fox lawyer, Blake Rohrbacher, sent a letter of apology to Davis on Friday, saying it was a misunderstanding and not an intention to deceive.

It’s not clear whether that would affect a trial. But it’s generally not wise to have a judge wonder at the outset of a trial whether your side is telling the truth, particularly when truth is the central point of the case, Jones said.

The lawsuit essentially comes down to whether Dominion can prove Fox acted with actual malice by putting something on the air knowing that it was false or acting with a “reckless disregard” for whether it was true. In most libel cases, that is the most difficult hurdle for plaintiffs to get past.

Dominion can point to many examples where Fox figures didn’t believe the charges being made by Trump allies such as Sidney Powell and Rudolph Giuliani. But Fox says many of those disbelievers were not in a position to decide when to air those allegations.

“We think it’s essential for them to connect those dots,” Fox lawyer Erin Murphy said.

If the case goes to trial, the jury will determine whether a powerful figure like Murdoch — who testified in a deposition that he didn’t believe the election-fraud charges — had the influence to keep the accusations off the air.

“Credibility is always important in any trial in any case. But it’s going to be really important in this case,” said Jane Kirtley, director of the Silha Center for the Study of Media Ethics and the Law at the University of Minnesota.

Kirtley is concerned that the suit may eventually advance to the U.S. Supreme Court, which could use it as a pretext to weaken the actual malice standard that was set in a 1964 decision in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. That, she feels, would be disastrous for journalists.

Dominion’s lawsuit is being closely watched by another voting-technology company with a separate but similar case against Fox News. Florida-based Smartmatic has looked to some rulings and evidence in the Dominion case to try to enhance its own $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit in New York. The Smartmatic case isn’t yet ready for trial but has survived Fox News’ effort to get it tossed out.

Many experts are surprised Fox and Dominion have not reached an out-of-court settlement, though they can at any time. There’s presumably a wide financial gulf. In court papers, Fox contends the $1.6 billion damages claim is a wild overestimate.

Dominion’s motivation may also be to inflict maximum embarrassment on Fox with the peek into the network’s internal communications following the election. Text messages from January 2021 revealed Carlson telling a friend that he passionately hated Trump and couldn’t wait to move on.

Dominion may also seek an apology.

The trial has had no apparent effect on Fox News’ viewership; it remains the top-rated cable network. Fox’s media reporter, Howard Kurtz, said earlier this year that he had been banned from covering the lawsuit, but the network has since changed direction. Kurtz discussed the case on his show Sunday, saying he would be in Wilmington for the beginning of the trial.

“The real potential danger is if Fox viewers get the sense that they’ve been lied to. There’s a real downside there,” said Charlie Sykes, founder of the Bulwark website and an MSNBC contributor.

There’s little indication that the case has changed Fox’s editorial direction. Fox has embraced Trump once again in recent weeks following the former president’s indictment by a Manhattan grand jury, and Carlson presented an alternate history of Capitol riot, based on tapes given to him by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.

Just because there has been limited discussion of the Dominion suit on Fox doesn’t mean its fans are unaware of it, said Tim Graham, director of media analysis at the conservative watchdog Media Research Center.

“There’s a certain amount of tribal reaction to this,” Graham said. “When all of the other networks are thrilling to revealing text messages and emails, they see this as the latest attempt by the liberal media to undermine Fox News. There’s going to be a rally-around-Rupert effect.”

Associated Press writer Jennifer Peltz contributed to this report.

For months, the South Carolina Republican has been building out the infrastructure of a possible presidential campaign, staffing up his political action committee and making trips to early voting states. He’s also honed a stump speech heavy on optimism and his belief in America’s “story of redemption.”

No other major presidential hopeful has so far launched an exploratory committee for 2024, though it does have some advantages.

A quick rundown on exploratory committees, how they’re used and why:

WHAT IS AN EXPLORATORY COMMITTEE?

An exploratory committee allows someone pondering a political bid to start raising money to support efforts like traveling and polling without officially becoming a candidate. It’s not required, but some potential candidates do it.

According to the Federal Election Commission, the mechanism — also known as “testing the waters” — is not required to register or report to the commission, as a candidate’s official campaign committee would be.

But any money raised during this time frame has to comply with federal contribution limits and be reported, if a campaign is ultimately launched. And if the process doesn’t lead to an official candidacy, the prospective candidate isn’t required to disclose any fundraising and spending activity from the exploratory phase.

WHY DO THIS?

Much of it can be a PR move.

By launching an exploratory committee, a potential candidate gets dual waves of media attention — the launch of the committee and then the official candidacy. In what’s already shaping up to be a large GOP field in 2024, that can be important, with a slew of candidates competing for advertising airwaves, media attention and donor dollars.

There are also financial implications. By launching his exploratory committee this week, Scott will have almost the entire second quarter of this year to amass his fundraising, in hopes of showcasing a significant number at its end.

Scott has already proved that he can attract significant fundraising. A pro-Scott super PAC, Opportunity Matters Fund, spent more than $20 million to help Republicans in 2022 and reported $13 million-plus on hand to start 2023. Tech billionaire Larry Ellison has donated at least $30 million to the organization since 2021, according to federal filings.

WHEN IS THE EXPLORATORY PERIOD OVER?

If a person pondering a bid engages in actual campaigning, according to the FEC, the exploratory period has reached its end. As defined by the commission, campaigning includes the person referring to himself or herself as a candidate, using “general public political advertising” to publicize a specific intent to campaign, or raising “more money than what is reasonably needed to test the waters,” though that amount isn’t defined.

Campaigning can also technically include informing the media “either directly or through an advisor” that a candidacy will be announced on a certain date.

This mechanism has led to oblique maneuvers by some leading up to an official kickoff, like former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley’s tease of a “special announcement” — not specifically a campaign — in the weeks before launching her own 2024 presidential bid. She formally announced she would run the day before a planned rally in Charleston.

WHY DOESN’T EVERY POTENTIAL CANDIDATE HAVE ONE?

The use of exploratory committees used to be more customary than it is today.

In 1999, businessman Donald Trump said that he had formed an exploratory committee to help him determine whether he could win the White House as a Reform Party candidate. Trump spiked that bid, though he went on to win the White House as a Republican in 2016 and is seeking the GOP nomination again next year.

A month before his White House launch, then-Illinois Democratic Sen. Barack Obama announced an exploratory committee. Four years later, Republicans Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum had committees of their own before official announcements, while Newt Gingrich thought about it and ultimately just jumped straight into the 2012 race.

Several Democrats who ultimately ran for their party’s 2020 nomination had exploratory efforts first, including Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand and former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julián Castro.

But some candidates skip straight into their official campaigns. Hillary Clinton did that for the 2016 election, as did Kamala Harris for 2020 and, this year, Haley.

The electoral board made it clear it wanted the registrar, Lindsey Taylor, gone.

Taylor had implemented dozens of new laws in 2020 and had run elections through the pandemic, but three weeks ago she and two part-time staff members quit. Their resignations followed that of a deputy registrar who left in February, citing the same frustrations and conflict.

“There were people saying that they had heard all these rumors — that the attorney general was going to indict me,” Taylor said, days after leaving the office for the last time. “Mentally, I just — I couldn’t take it anymore.”

Residents were left with no way to register to vote or to certify candidate paperwork until the GOP restaffs the empty office.

Read more at NBCNews.com.

Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Janet Protasiewicz defeated former Justice Dan Kelly, who previously worked for Republicans and had support from the state’s leading anti-abortion groups. It’s his second loss in a race for Supreme Court in three years.

The new court controlled 4-3 by liberals is expected to decide a pending lawsuit challenging the state’s 1849 law banning abortion. Protasiewicz made the issue a focus of her campaign and won the support of Planned Parenthood and other abortion rights groups.

The court is also expected to hear a new challenge to Republican-drawn legislative maps. Protasiewicz ran as a critic of the current maps, calling them “rigged.”

The court came within one vote of overturning President Joe Biden’s win in the state in 2020, and both major parties are preparing for another close race in 2024.

With so much at stake, the race became the most expensive contest for a state Supreme Court seat in U.S. history. Protasiewicz will begin her 10-year term in August. She replaces retiring conservative Justice Pat Roggensack.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. AP’s earlier story follows below.

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Wisconsin voters were deciding the outcome of the most expensive judicial race in U.S. history on Tuesday in a heated contest that will likely determine the fate of abortion access, the future of Republican-drawn legislative maps, voting rights and years of other GOP policies.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has been under conservative control for 15 years, serving as the final word on a wide array of Republican policies enacted by the GOP-controlled Legislature. The court came within one vote of overturning President Joe Biden’s narrow win in 2020.

Democratic-backed candidate Janet Protasiewicz, 60, faces Republican-backed Dan Kelly, 58, in a contest that has nearly tripled the $15 million cost of a 2004 Illinois tilt that had been the most expensive court race in U.S. history.

After polls closed Tuesday, all eyes were on the outcome of a race that will determine whether Democratic-backed justices take control of the high court for at least the next two years, including the run-up and aftermath of the 2024 presidential election. Four of the past six presidential elections in Wisconsin have been decided by less than a percentage point and Trump turned to the courts in 2020 in his unsuccessful push to overturn his roughly 21,000-vote loss in the state.

Protasiewicz, a Milwaukee County judge, largely focused her campaign around abortion, saying she supports abortion rights but stopping short of saying how she would rule on a pending lawsuit challenging Wisconsin’s 174-year-old ban that was enacted a year after statehood. She called Kelly an “extreme partisan” and claimed that if he wins, Kelly would uphold the ban. Kelly has not said how he would rule.

Kelly has expressed opposition to abortion in the past, including in a 2012 blog post in which he said the Democratic Party and the National Organization for Women were committed to normalizing the taking of human life. He also has done legal work for Wisconsin Right to Life.

Kelly is a former justice who has also performed work for Republicans and advised them on a plan to have fake GOP electors cast their ballots for Trump following the 2020 election even though Trump had lost. He is endorsed by the state’s top three anti-abortion groups, while Protasiewicz is backed by Planned Parenthood and other abortion rights advocates.

Protasiewicz called Kelly “a true threat to our democracy” because of his advising on the fake elector scheme..

Kelly was appointed to the state Supreme Court by then-Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican, in 2016. He served four years before being defeated in 2020 on the same ballot as the Democratic presidential primary. Kelly was endorsed by Trump that year.

Trump did not endorse this year. Protasiewicz’s endorsements include Hillary Clinton.

Kelly tried to distance himself from his work for Republicans, saying it was “irrelevant” to how he would work as a justice. He tried to make the campaign about Protasiewicz’s record as a judge, arguing that she was soft on crime and accusing her of being “bought and paid for” by Democrats.

The Wisconsin Democratic Party gave Protasiewicz’s campaign more than $8 million, leading her to promise to recuse herself from any case brought by the party. Kelly refused to promise to step down from any case brought by his supporters, which include the state chamber of commerce.

In addition to abortion, Protasiewicz was outspoken on Wisconsin’s gerrymandered legislative maps, calling them “rigged.” Kelly accused her of prejudging that case, abortion and others that could come before the court.

The state Supreme Court upheld Republican-drawn maps in 2022. Those maps, widely regarded as among the most gerrymandered in the country, have helped Republicans increase their hold on the state Legislature to near supermajority levels, even as Democrats have won statewide elections, including Tony Evers as governor in both 2018 and 2022 and Biden in 2020.

The winner will serve a 10-year term starting in August replacing retiring conservative Justice Pat Roggensack. She is part of the current 4-3 conservative majority.

Dominion Voting Systems is seeking to compel Fox News’ top TV personalities to appear as witnesses before a jury in a trial scheduled to begin next month.

Dominion’s live witness list of Fox Corp.’s right-wing TV networks includes Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Maria Bartiromo and Jeanine Pirro, as well as former host Lou Dobbs and Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott, according to court papers.

Dominion has pointed to 20 broadcasts in which they believe the hosts on Fox News and Fox Business repeated false claims of election fraud and continuously had on guests who repeated those claims. Documents, including text messages and emails, show Fox’s TV hosts were skeptical of the election fraud claims being made on air.

Dominion brought the defamation lawsuit against Fox Corp. and its right wing networks, arguing its hosts pushed false claims that its voting machines were rigged in the 2020 election, which Donald Trump lost to Joe Biden. Trump, who is running for president in 2024, has repeatedly claimed that the election was stolen from him. On Jan. 6, 2021, hundreds of his supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to block Congress from confirming Biden’s victory.

Dominion and Fox argued during a hearing Tuesday over what witnesses could be present at the trial in April, and logistics around how it will work.

Dominion is also requesting the depositions of Fox Corp. executives, including Chairman Rupert Murdoch and CEO Lachlan Murdoch, as well as others, be included in the trial.

“Dominion’s needlessly expansive live witness list is yet another attempt to generate headlines and distract from the many shortcomings of its case. Ultimately, this case is about the First Amendment protections of the media’s absolute right to cover the news,” a Fox spokesperson said in a statement Tuesday.

Although the elder Murdoch is not being called to appear in person, Fox had opposed the possibility of him going to Delaware in April since he earlier gave seven hours worth of testimony.

Judge Eric Davis on Tuesday said had Murdoch been on the witness list, Fox wouldn’t have been able to argue hardship, given he has recently been engaged and had discussed travel plans.

While both Dominion and Fox last week urged Davis to make a ruling without going to trial next month, the case has to proceed as if a trial will take place. Davis indicated he would make a ruling before the scheduled April 17 trial start date. If a trial occurs, it is expected to last for weeks. 

Dominion alleges its business suffered in the months following the election when the claims were made on Fox’s networks. 

Fox has denied the claims and has argued it is protected by the First Amendment.

The lawsuit has been heating up recently as reams of evidence from both sides has been published, consisting of pages of full excerpts of testimony from depositions, text messages and emails. 

In addition, a former Fox producer, who worked on the shows of Bartiromo and Carlson, came forward last week alleging she was coerced into providing misleading testimony as part of the Dominion lawsuit. 

Abby Grossberg, who filed lawsuits against Fox in New York and Delaware, has also accused the network of discrimination. Following her lawsuits going public last week, Grossberg’s attorneys said in court papers that she was fired by Fox in retaliation. 

In court papers filed Monday, Grossberg said that while she cannot be compelled to testify at the trial, she would only voluntarily testify on behalf of Dominion.

Grossberg was included on Dominion’s witness list on Tuesday.

A Fox spokesperson explained the decision to fire Grossberg: “Like most organizations, Fox News Media’s attorneys engage in privileged communications with our employees as necessary to provide legal advice. Last week, our attorneys advised Ms. Grossberg that, while she was free to file whatever legal claims she wished, she was in possession of our privileged information and was not authorized to disclose it publicly. We were clear that if she violated our instructions, Fox would take appropriate action including termination. Ms. Grossberg ignored these communications and chose to file her complaint without taking any steps to protect those portions containing Fox’s privileged information. We will continue to vigorously defend Fox against Ms. Grossberg’s unmeritorious legal claims, which are riddled with false allegations against Fox and our employees.”

“We are upset about this country, we’re worried about this country,” Williamson told a crowd of more than 600 at a kickoff in the nation’s capital. “It is our job to create a vision of justice and love that is so powerful that it will override the forces of hatred and injustice and fear.”

The 70-year-old onetime spiritual adviser to Oprah Winfrey should provide only token primary opposition — a testament to how strongly national Democrats are united behind Biden. Still, she tweaked the president, a longtime Amtrak rider, by holding her opening rally at the ornately marble-columned presidential suite at Union Station, Washington’s railway hub.

Biden gave his own speech from Union Station just before last November’s elections, when he led Democrats to a surprisingly strong showing, urging voters to reject political extremism and saying “democracy itself” was at stake.

Williamson, whose red, blue and black campaign signs feature the dual slogans “A New Beginning” and “Disrupt the System,” says she’ll be campaigning in early-voting states on the 2024 election calendar.

That includes New Hampshire, which has threatened to defy a Biden-backed plan by the Democratic National Committee to have South Carolina lead off the nominating contests. Democrats and Republicans in New Hampshire have warned that if Biden skips the state’s unsanctioned primary and a rival wins it, that outcome could prove embarrassing for the sitting president — even if that challenger has no real shot of actually being the nominee.

Striking a defiant tone Saturday, Williamson denounced “those who feel they are the adults in the room” and aren’t taking her candidacy seriously, proclaiming, “Let me in there.”

“I have run for president before. I am not naïve about these forces which have no intention of allowing anyone into this conversation who does not align with their predetermined agenda,” she said. “I understand that, in their mind, only people who previously have been entrenched in the car that brought us into this ditch can possibly be considered qualified to bring us out of it.”

Luke Stowell, 20, a musician and student at American University in Washington who sat in the front row for Williamson’s announcement, said “she has a really nice message that incorporates all of the prejudices and the social structures that inhibit, I think, a lot of people on a daily basis.”

Seated next to him, 24-year-old American University law student Ivan Claudio noted that, should he win a second term, Biden would be in his late 80s by the time he leaves office and “I think it is a cause for concern.”

Biden, the oldest president in U.S. history, would be 86 at the end of a second term. Most people in the United States — and even most Democrats — say they don’t want him to run again, according to a poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

The president is expected to announce in the coming weeks that he’s running again. His political advisers have said they aren’t worried about the Democratic primary but that Biden is anxious to defeat Donald Trump again in the general election. They say a 2024 campaign against another GOP nominee, such as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, would look much the same because top Republicans remain promoters of Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement.

Williamson didn’t mention Biden by name in her speech, and though she noted that Trump not being reelected in 2020 kept the country from going “over the cliff,” she also said it was still “six inches” from doing so.

The Democratic establishment — and even potential presidential hopefuls who could have competed against Biden from the left or middle — is behind Biden, showing how smooth his path to the nomination probably will be. Even if other Democrats follow Williamson into the race, the party is not planning to hold primary debates.

Williamson said she was opposing a free market “mindset” and corrupt political system that she said prioritized greed above all else “like an atomizer spray of economic injustice.”

“The American people have been trained to expect so little,” she said. “The American people have been played.”

A Texas native who now lives in Beverly Hills, California, Williamson is the author of more than a dozen books and ran an unsuccessful independent congressional campaign in California in 2014. In 2020, she was best known for wanting to create a Department of Peace and arguing the federal government should pay large financial reparations to Black Americans as atonement for centuries of slavery and discrimination.

Arguably her most memorable moment of that campaign came during a primary debate when she called for a “moral uprising,” but she dropped out of the race shortly before the leadoff Iowa caucuses began.

She said Saturday that the nation faced so many challenges, “I’m not saying one person can fix it. Not even one president can fix it.”

“But let me tell you something,” Williamson added. “A president who tells it like it is would do a lot of good.”

Johnson, who tried to run for Michigan governor last year but was deemed by the state’s elections bureau to have filed thousands of fraudulent nominating signatures, announced his White House candidacy to a group of supporters on Thursday night, his campaign said. Hours earlier, he had spoken at the opening day of the annual Conservative Political Action Conference just outside Washington, D.C.

Johnson did not directly mention his presidential campaign when he spoke at the CPAC gathering in Oxon Hill, Maryland, where a handful of other candidates and potential contenders including former President Donald Trump are slated to speak Friday and Saturday.

More Decision 2024 Coverage:

news Mar 1

Biden Speaks at House Democrats' Conference as 2024 Elections Approach

news Feb 14

Nikki Haley Enters Race for President as First Major Challenger to Trump for the Republican Nomination

Johnson spent money earlier this year to run an ad during the Super Bowl targeting voters in Iowa, the first state to vote on the GOP presidential field, touting his plan to cut federal spending by 2% every year.

The businessman earned a fortune starting Michigan-based Perry Johnson Registrars Inc., which certifies if businesses are meeting industrial standards. He was considered a top 2022 GOP candidate for Michigan governor before he and four other Republican hopefuls were disqualified because of invalid signatures.

Staffers at the state elections bureau said that Johnson turned in 13,800 valid signatures but that they tossed 9,393, including 6,983 they said were fraudulent. Johnson, who was willing to spend millions of dollars on his campaign for the governor’s office, said his rights were violated during the process.

The Texas-size hole in the field will be on stark display Friday at a closed Republican donor event outside the state capital, Austin, featuring the likes of former Vice President Mike Pence, who is expected to mount a campaign, and former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, who announced her bid last week.

Some Texans could still run. Republican Gov. Greg Abbott won’t decide until after Memorial Day. Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, who ran in 2016, says he’s focused for now on reelection next year. Will Hurd, a onetime CIA agent and former Republican congressman from San Antonio, is seriously considering a bid and may bring on staff, aides say.

If none of them seeks the White House, it’d be the first time since 1972 without at least one major candidate who rose to public prominence in Texas or lived in the state while running for or holding office.

Finding the next most recent Texan-less presidential cycle requires going all the way back to 1952, four years before Lyndon B. Johnson made his first attempt at the White House.

“Clearly, there’s some constitutional amendment that voters supported back in the day that says, ‘If you’re a governor of Texas, you must consider running for president,’” joked Dave Carney, Abbott’s chief strategist and a top strategist to Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s 2012 presidential bid. “And many of them have. For good or bad.”

Some Texans’ White House runs were indeed forgettable.

That includes Democratic Sen. Lloyd Bentsen’s 1976 run and bids by Republican Rep. Ron Paul in 2008 and Republican Sen. Phil Gramm in 1996. John Connally was Texas’ Democratic governor from 1963 until 1969 but sought the White House as a Republican in 1980. Dallas businessman Ross Perot never held elected office but mounted major presidential campaigns in 1992 and 1996.

Indeed, if this cycle proceeds without a Texas official, it won’t be a sign of the state’s waning political influence. Texas’ booming population has added nearly 4 million residents since 2010 while getting younger and more diverse. Its strong economy has attracted tech companies and corporate stalwarts who have flocked in from around the country.

Texas has also become a bastion of conservative priorities, enacting one of the nation’s strictest anti-abortion laws even before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and dramatically loosening gun restrictions while calling for federal crackdowns along the U.S.-Mexico border.

“I think every year a Texan’s not in the presidential race is disappointing to me,” said George Seay, a major GOP donor based in Dallas who was Perry’s finance chair in 2012 and supported Marco Rubio in 2016.

“With all due respect to Florida, which is an incredibly compelling, right-leaning state from a political standpoint,” Seay added, “Texas is the sun, the moon and the stars.”

A possible presidential race without a Texan would be a departure from recent cycles, which featured more than one. The 2012 GOP presidential primary pitted Paul against Perry and 2016’s featured Perry and Cruz. Former Rep. Beto O’Rourke and former San Antonio Mayor Julián Castro both ran in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary.

Although only three presidents have actually called Texas home, the state has left a mark on Washington.

Long after he left office, a Braniff Airlines flight dubbed the “LBJ Special” continued to fly from Washington Dulles to Austin every afternoon, an unusual nonstop flight for the time. President George W. Bush’s ranch in Crawford, Texas, was the “Western White House” but only because Johnson’s ranch in Stonewall, where he spent nearly a quarter of his presidency, had already claimed the “Texas White House” moniker.

Bush even flew his favorite caterer, Eddie Deen, from suburban Dallas to Washington to serve smoked ribs and stuffed jalapenos at his inaugural balls. His father, President George H.W. Bush, was a congressman from Houston and incorporated the state’s rugged ethos into his political brand, trying to season his Northeast upbringing with a dash of down-home.

“Everything is bigger in Texas, including the egos of our already outsize politicians,” said Mark Updegrove, CEO of the Lyndon Baines Johnson Foundation, who noted that playing up their Texas swagger has paid off through the decades for presidential candidates from both parties.

Since the modern era of presidential campaigning began in 1972, Texans have been involved in more cycles than any other state. Candidates from California have launched more overall bids at 19, according to Eric Ostermeier, a research fellow at University of Minnesota’s Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs. But Texans and New Yorkers are second, producing 15 total candidacies each.

Ostermeier says he counts a home state as where a candidate rose to public prominence or lived when they ran for office. That means Houston-born Marianne Williamson, who lives in Beverly Hills and is readying a 2024 Democratic presidential bid, would qualify as a Californian.

More clarity on possible Texans in the 2024 primary campaign will come after the state Legislature adjourns in late May. Carney said Abbott will then “look at what the state of the race is, and does he have something that would be differentiating to the race that would be attractive to voters.”

“The governor will not be a spoiler,” Carney said. “But, if he thinks he has something to offer, he might run. If he thinks there’s enough folks running with the same, similar ideas that he has,” then probably not.

Hurd, who retired from Congress in 2021 after three terms representing Texas’ most competitive House district, traveled to New Hampshire recently and is planning trips to other early primary states.

Cruz says he’s concentrating on his Senate race next year but hasn’t ruled out another presidential run. He could do both. Texas’ so-called LBJ law allows running for Senate and president simultaneously, and Bentsen was reelected to his seat while losing the vice presidency in 1988.

A Cruz aide called the prospect of no Texans in the presidential race since 1972 a “clever bit of trivia.”

Rupert Murdoch and Fox News hosts expressed disbelief in former President Donald Trump‘s false election fraud claims, according to evidence released from Dominion Voting Systems’ $1.6 billion lawsuit against Fox Corp. and its cable TV networks.  

In court papers filed Thursday, text messages and testimony from depositions show that Fox executives and TV personalities were skeptical about claims that the election between the victorious Joe Biden, a Democrat, and Trump, a Republican, was rigged. 

The release follows months of discovery and depositions that have remained private until Thursday, when the companies filed court papers before a Delaware judge laying out each of their cases and unveiling recently gathered evidence. The documents were revealed hours after authorities in Georgia released a small portion of a grand jury report regarding a separate criminal probe into Trump’s alleged election meddling in that state.

Dominion brought the defamation lawsuit against Fox and its right-wing cable networks, Fox News and Fox Business, arguing the networks and its anchors made false claims that its voting machines rigged the results of the 2020 election. 

“Really crazy stuff. And damaging,” Fox Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch said in an email on Nov. 19, weeks after the election, regarding claims Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani was making on Fox News. 

Top Fox News anchors like Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham expressed disbelief in what Sidney Powell, a pro-Trump attorney who had aggressively promoted claims of election fraud, had said at the time, too. 

“Sydney Powell is lying,” Tucker Carlson said in a text message to his producer, misspelling Powell’s first name. Meanwhile Laura Ingraham said in a message to Carlson: “Sidney is a complete nut. No one will work with her. Ditto with Rudy.”

“It’s unbelievably offensive to me. Our viewers are good people and they believe it,” Carlson responded, according to court papers. These messages came in the weeks after the election. 

Dominion said in court papers that Fox admitted Hannity and Lou Dobbs’ shows did not “challenge the narrative” that Dominion was responsible for rigging the election or producing inaccurate results. 

On Thursday, both Fox Corp. and Fox News also filed their own motions for summary judgment. Fox Corp., which saw its push to have the case dismissed denied by the court, said in court papers that following a year of discovery, the record in the case shows it had “no role in the creation and publication of the challenged statements – all of which aired on either Fox Business Network or Fox News Channel.” 

In recent months Murdoch, as well as his son Lachlan Murdoch, the CEO of Fox Corp., faced depositions as part of the lawsuit. 

Fox News said once again in court papers that it “fulfilled its commitment to inform fully and comment fairly,” on the claims that Dominion rigged the election against Trump. 

“There will be a lot of noise and confusion generated by Dominion and their opportunistic private equity owners, but the core of this case remains about freedom of the press and freedom of speech, which are fundamental rights afforded by the Constitution and protected by New York Times v. Sullivan,” Fox said in a statement issued Thursday. 

Fox targeted Dominion’s private-equity owner in an unredacted counterclaim to Dominion’s request for $1.6 billion in damages, according to court papers filed Thursday, saying the firm “paid a small fraction of that amount” to acquire Dominion.

In court papers, Fox said the $1.6 billion figure “has no connection Dominion’s financial value as a company or any supposed injury it suffered as a result” of its reporting, and found no evidence in the discovery process that Dominion lost any contracts as a result.

“Dominion’s ten-figure damage claim demonstrates the danger that unfounded litigation poses to a free press. Threatening FNN with a $1.6 billion judgment will no doubt cause other media outlets to think twice before reporting allegations that are inconvenient to Dominion — and other companies,” Fox said in court papers.

A Dominion spokesperson didn’t comment and its private equity owner, Staple Street Capital, didn’t respond to a request for comment. 

“Here, however, overwhelming direct evidence establishes Fox’s knowledge of falsity, not just ‘doubts,'” Dominion said in court papers Thursday, pointing to multiple defamatory statements. 

The court papers filed by Dominion, Fox News and its parent company all contained redactions, however.

On Friday, Dominion filed a challenge to the redactions, calling for the Delaware judge to make all of the documents public. Dominion said it did not make any of the redactions, and they all came at the request of Fox.

“Dominion’s position is that nothing in these three briefs warrants confidential treatment,” according to the filing. A Fox spokesperson didn’t immediately comment on the challenge.

Dominion noted the audience backlash Fox News faced on the 2020 election night when it called Arizona for Biden, later seeing competing right-wing networks like Newsmax take advantage of the opening with the audience. 

Dominion’s findings point to hosts including Carlson, Ingraham and Hannity understanding “the threat to them personally.” Dominion points to messages Carlson sent to his producer on Nov. 5, “We worked really hard to build what we have. Those f—-ers are destroying our credibility. It enrages me.” 

The pressure Fox’s top personalities felt from their audience base is strewn throughout messages in the weeks following the election and Fox’s early call. It even continued through Jan. 6, when a violent mob of Trump supporters breached the U.S. Capitol.

That evening, Carlson texted his producer calling Trump “a demonic force. A destroyer. But he’s not going to destroy us,” court papers show.

Meanwhile, on the night before the Jan. 6 riot on the Capitol, Rupert Murdoch told Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott, “It’s been suggested our prime time three should independently or together say something like ‘the election is over and Joe Biden won,'” according to court papers. Saying so “would go a long way to stop the Trump myth that the election stolen,” he added.

The case is being watched closely by First Amendment watchdogs and experts. Libel lawsuits are typically centered around one falsehood. In this case Dominion cites a lengthy list of examples of Fox TV hosts making false claims even after they were proven to be untrue. Media companies are often broadly protected by the First Amendment. 

These cases are typically settled out of court or dismissed quickly. But the Delaware judge overseeing the case has so far dismissed such requests. The trial is slated to begin in mid-April. 

Last week, during a status conference, Dominion’s attorney called out concerns that some evidence, such as board meeting minutes and the results of searches of personal drives, had yet to be produced by Fox and its TV networks. 

Russia and Iran have meddled in previous elections, including attempts to tap into internet-connected electronic voter databases. Distracted by war and protests, neither country appeared to disrupt last year’s midterm elections, but security officials said they expect U.S. foes to be more active as the next presidential election season draws near. The first primaries are less than a year away.

Jen Easterly, director of the federal Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, referenced Russia’s attack on Ukraine and the U.S.-led effort to supply weapons and other aid to the besieged country as a possible motivator. She said the agency was “very concerned about potential retaliation from Russia of our critical infrastructure.”

She also mentioned China as a possible source of election interference, especially as the relationship between the two countries has deteriorated, mostly recently over the suspected spy balloon that floated across the country before being shot down by a U.S. fighter jet.

“We’ve not seen anything here, but I’d like to end that with the word – yet,” said Easterly, speaking during the annual gathering of the National Association of Secretaries of State.

Of particular concern is the decentralized nature of America’s election system. There are some 10,000 local voting jurisdictions throughout the U.S., including counties and townships, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

news Feb 16

Georgia Grand Jury Recommends Perjury Indictments in Trump Election Meddling Probe

Donald Trump Dec 20, 2022

How Congress Is Changing the Electoral Count Law in Response to Trump and Jan. 6

Not all of those have funding for new equipment, proper staffing or updated training of election workers. Easterly said it was a priority of her agency to get money and expertise to what she termed “target-rich, cyber-poor” entities.

Meagan Wolfe, administrator of the Wisconsin Elections Commission, said her state has about 1,850 local officials running elections, which makes it difficult to disburse federal money in a way that is effective over the long term. Wisconsin is a perennial swing state, where four of the past six presidential races have been decided by less than a percentage point and election conspiracies have found fertile ground since the 2020 election.

“A lot of times if you don’t see anything bad happen in the cybersecurity space, it’s kind of forgotten about,” said Wolfe, who also is president of the National Association of State Election Directors. “People don’t remember that this is a real and imminent threat, and so getting those local jurisdictions, their governing bodies, to really buy into this concept and to support sustainable solutions for local election jurisdictions continues to be a real challenge, as well.”

Several secretaries of state called for additional federal funding for local election offices, which not only must prepare for cybersecurity threats but also have had to deal with harassment and threats since 2020.

Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes noted that election workers and even voters in his state’s most populous county, Maricopa, have been targets of harassment and intimidation.

Stephen Spaulding, policy director for the U.S. Senate Committee on Rules & Administration, said the committee’s chairwoman, Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar, is trying to obtain more election funding after an attempt late last year fizzled. Congress allocated $75 million in election security grants to states, but that was far short of what many state and local officials had requested.

“More than $75 million from last year’s omnibus is clearly needed in our view,” Spaulding said. “We have repeatedly heard about how sustainable funding ensures our elections continue to run smoothly, facilitate predictability and planning, and we’re striving to work on a bipartisan basis to get that done.”

Tarrant County Sheriff Bill Waybourn, District Attorney Phil Sorrells, and Tarrant County Judge Tim O’Hare announced the creation of the “Election Integrity Task Force” on Wednesday. According to Sheriff Waybourn, the task force will include existing resources and county personnel such as investigators and a prosecuting attorney.

“We want to ensure the good citizens of Tarrant County that we intend to pursue any complaint regarding election issues, whether it’s evidence or probable cause that a crime has been committed,” Sheriff Waybourn said. “Over the last several years, we have had complaints filed of election misconduct. There have been follow-ups on these complaints and some of them are still under review.”

Waybourn did not disclose how many complaints there have been, nor did he disclose details of the complaints that are currently still under review. During a press conference Wednesday, Waybourn pointed to a 2018 case when criminal charges were filed against a judge over election violations.

Prior to Sept. 2022, Waybourn said complaints were often directed to the office of Texas Attorney Ken Paxton. In late Sept. 2022, Texas’ highest criminal court confirmed Paxton needs permission from local prosecutors to pursue election cases.

This task force will help make filing complaints more efficient, according to Waybourn. Sorells said he also heard concerns over election integrity “throughout the campaign”, though he was unable to elaborate on specific incidents.

“We’re not concerned that elections have been invalid. What we want to ensure to the public is that our elections are secure,” Sorrells said.

Judge Tim O’Hare said a woman who was an election judge during early voting and voting in November met with him for about an hour Tuesday. O’Hare said she recalled feeling unsafe, pointing to an example of people not respecting the 100-feet space rule.

“I think every one of us here should all be in favor of fair, secure, honest elections. If this goes towards that, then I think it’s great,” O’Hare said.

Emily Eby French is a staff attorney with the Texas Civil Rights Project. The non-profit works with voters across the state. During election season, some of the most common questions they get from voters include where to find their polling locations and information on registration.

Eby French said a task force of this kind is not necessary.

“Local prosecutors already have the power to investigate issues of voter fraud. There are very, very few issues of voter fraud,” she said. “The Secretary of State did an analysis of the 2020 election. In Tarrant County, they found 12 possible incidences out of 850,000 votes cast. That doesn’t move the needle on anything. It’s important to note, the state has already looked at those.”

She added, there are concerns a task force of this kind could result in voter intimidation.

“From talking to voters, thousands and thousands of voters across the state in every election since 2018, I can tell you when voters see more laws and they see things criminalized around voting, they get nervous. Even if they’re doing exactly what they’re supposed to do,” she said.

O’Hare addressed questions behind the evidence of voter fraud and voter intimidation.

“It’s like bank robbery. Is it okay to have one bank robbery, or two? Is it okay to have one kidnapping or two or three? So, there shouldn’t be any voter fraud. This will go a long towards deterring it,” he said.  “The idea that this is somehow voter intimidation, who would we be intimidating? People who are cheating? People that are committing crimes? Well, we want to intimidate that.”

Heider Garcia, elections administrator for Tarrant County, is not part of this task force. O’Hare said he “expects him [Garcia] to cooperate”, though he is not a member because the task force is focused on investigation and prosecution. Garcia told NBC 5, he did not have a comment on Wednesday.

To submit tips and leads, residents can contact the Tarrant County Sheriff’s Office at 817-884-1213.

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney will hear arguments from the district attorney’s office, news outlets and potentially other parties before making a decision on the release of the report. The special grand jury, whose work was overseen by McBurney, recommended that the report be made public.

The report is expected to include recommendations for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis on possible criminal prosecution, though it’s unclear just how specific those recommendations will be. The special grand jury did not have the power to issue indictments, and it will ultimately be up to Willis to decide whether to seek indictments from a regular grand jury.

If McBurney decides to disseminate the report, he must also determine whether any parts of it should be redacted and whether the report should be made public now or later. It’s unclear how quickly he will rule.

The investigation is one of several that threatens potential legal consequences for the former president as he seeks reelection in 2024. Over a period of roughly seven months, the special grand jury heard from dozens of witnesses, including high-profile Trump allies, including attorney Rudy Giuliani and Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, and high-ranking Georgia officials, such as Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and Gov. Brian Kemp.

Willis began investigating shortly after a recording of a January 2021 phone call between Trump and Raffensperger became public. In that call, the president suggested that the state’s top elections official, a fellow Republican, could “find” the votes needed to overturn his loss to Democrat Joe Biden.

“I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have,” Trump had said. “Because we won the state.”

A coalition of news organizations, including The Associated Press, argued in favor of the report’s release in full, saying in a filing Monday that the document “is a court record subject to a presumption of openness” under state court rules and the state and federal constitutions. The media group said that the public interest in the report is “extraordinary” and that there “are no countervailing interests sufficient to overcome the presumption.”

Willis had not filed a brief by Monday outlining whether the report should be released.

Trump’s legal team in Georgia said in a statement that they do not plan to be present or to participate in the hearing.

“To date, we have never been a part of this process,” Drew Findling, Marissa Goldberg and Jennifer Little wrote, noting that the former president was never subpoenaed or asked to come in voluntarily as part of the investigation.

“Therefore, we can assume that the grand jury did their job and looked at the facts and the law, as we have, and concluded there were no violations of the law by President Trump,” they wrote.

The order granting Willis’ request for a special grand jury authorized the panel to “make recommendations concerning criminal prosecution as it shall see fit.”

A grand jury handbook produced by the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia says courts have repeatedly held that a grand jury “cannot include, in a report or general presentment, comments that charge or accuse identifiable person(s) of misconduct.” That can only be done in a charging document, like an indictment, the handbook says.

“I don’t think you can accuse anybody specifically of committing a crime, so it’s going to have to be a general recommendation” on whether the district attorney should continue to pursue the investigation, Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council executive director Pete Skandalakis said of the report.

If the special grand jury did recommend that specific people be charged, Skandalakis said he believes that would have to be redacted before the report can be released.

While the special grand jury’s work took place in secret, as required by law, related public court filings provided a glimpse of investigative threads that were being pursued. Those included:

— Phone calls by Trump and others to Georgia officials in the wake of the 2020 election.

— A group of 16 Georgia Republicans who signed a certificate in December 2020 falsely stating that Trump had won the state and that they were the state’s “duly elected and qualified” electors.

— False allegations of election fraud made during meetings of state legislators at the Georgia Capitol in December 2020.

— The copying of data and software from election equipment in rural Coffee County by a computer forensics team hired by Trump allies.

— Alleged attempts to pressure Fulton County elections worker Ruby Freeman into falsely confessing to election fraud.

— The abrupt resignation of the U.S. attorney in Atlanta in January 2021.

Even with proponents of Trump’s election lies roundly defeated during this year’s midterms, advocates on both sides of the voting debate are bracing for another round of election-related legislation. Republicans are eager to tighten election rules further while Democrats, who took control of two additional statehouses, will seek to make it easier to cast a ballot.

Minnesota’s newly reelected Democratic secretary of state, Steve Simon, said he had spoken to several secretaries of state who are eager to push for changes in voting. Losses by election-denier candidates in top races have emboldened some Democrats to champion expansions of voting rights.

“Voters spoke loudly and clearly about what they wanted and didn’t want, both in regards to this office and all these other issues,” said Simon, who defeated a Republican challenger who parroted some of Trump’s lies about the 2020 election.

Democrats won majorities in both houses of the Minnesota Legislature in November, giving Simon a good shot at enacting changes. He expects to urge lawmakers to adopt automatic voter registration and allow high school students to pre-register.

States routinely make adjustments in their voting laws — some subtle, some dramatic. But experts have never seen an explosion of legislation like that which followed the 2020 presidential election, when more than 3,600 election bills were introduced, according to the Voting Rights Lab, which tracks the legislation.

Liz Avore, senior adviser to the group, said 22 states in the last couple of years expanded access to the ballot, 10 created new restrictions and five expanded access in some ways while creating new barriers in others. This, she said, has created a divide in the U.S. in which “your ZIP code determines your access to our democracy.”

100 ELECTION-RELATED PROPOALS ALREADY FILED IN TEXAS

That divide seems likely to grow next year. Legislatures won’t convene until January at the earliest, so it’s unclear how many bills are being drafted and on which subjects. But Texas, where the Legislature meets only once every two years and lawmakers can “pre-file” drafts of legislation for the upcoming session, offers a preview.

The Associated Press has identified nearly 100 election-related legislative proposals already filed in the state, both to increase access to the ballot box and to further restrict it. This includes one that would allow the state’s top lawyer to assign a prosecutor focused on election crimes, testing the boundaries of a court ruling earlier this year that said the attorney general did not have the authority to prosecute election crimes.

Another would assign a group of peace officers to serve as election marshals who investigate claims of election-related missteps. That would follow the lead of Florida, where officers in a special unit assigned to elections have already made a handful of arrests — including of people who mistakenly thought they were eligible to vote under a 2018 constitutional amendment restoring voting rights to some felons. Critics have labeled the unit a political tool of the governor.

Matt Simpson, a senior attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, said current election legislation proposed in the state, such as increasing criminal penalties for election crimes and creating election marshals, is “extreme” and “very intimidating” for voters. He said these approaches are primarily political and don’t solve actual voting-related issues, such as high rejection rates of mail ballots and ballot applications due to widespread confusion on the identification numbers necessary.

“It is certainly the case that Texas elections do not have widespread fraud,” Simpson said. “These bills, these concerns that are raised, are solutions in search of a problem.”

The reliability of Texas’ elections was underscored by the December release of an audit by the secretary of state’s office. The 359-page audit of the 2020 election in the state’s two largest Democratic counties and two largest Republican ones found some “irregularities,” but they were largely related to holding an election during a pandemic.

“In most cases, the audit found that the counties followed their procedures and clearly documented their activities,” the audit says.

OTHER STATES PUSH FOR ELECTION-RELATED LEGISLATION

Ohio is another Republican-controlled state where lawmakers continue to push for restrictions.

The state is likely to draw national attention next year after Republicans indicated they might try again to place on the May ballot a measure requiring a 60% majority for any future constitutional amendments to pass. That provision could limit the ability of Ohio voters to rein in GOP gerrymandering or otherwise counter the majority-Republican Legislature, such as by codifying the right to an abortion.

Republicans failed to muster enough votes during December’s lame-duck session to place the higher threshold for passing amendments on the ballot, but they did pass a sweeping election law overhaul. The bill adds a photo ID requirement for voters and provides them for free, codifies a directive requiring one ballot drop box per county and eliminates early voting on the Monday before Election Day — county officials had said it interfered with their final preparations. The legislation also shrinks the window for receiving mail-in ballots after the election from 10 days to four.

Republican state Sen. Theresa Gavarone said taking steps to tighten access to the voting booth and speed vote counting are aimed at improving the “perception, confidence and integrity” in elections.

“Folks, perception matters,” Gavarone said. “Whether you want to believe it or not, the goal should not just be to secure our elections, but it’s imperative that we give people doubting the results of our elections reason to participate in them.”

Voting rights advocates were outraged.

“This legislation will make voting unnecessarily harder for seniors, students, rural Ohioans, active-duty military and other eligible Ohioans,” said Jen Miller, executive director of the League of Women Voters Ohio.

The office of Republican Gov. Mike DeWine said he was reviewing the legislation.

Democrats are readying their own pushes, especially in two states where they won control of the legislatures and retained the governorship — Michigan and Minnesota.

Michigan voters not only gave Democrats control of the state Legislature, they also passed Proposal 2, a sweeping ballot initiative that expanded early and mail voting. Democrats already are preparing to strengthen the measure in the legislative session.

“There will need to be quite a bit of implementation legislation next term, and I look forward to working with the Legislature and the governor’s office to enact this,” Ingham County Clerk Barb Byrum, a Democrat, said in an interview.

Jake Rollow, a spokesman for the Michigan Department of State, said Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson will likely ask lawmakers to allocate $100 million annually for local election offices and propose new measures against circulating election misinformation. A Democratic state lawmaker also proposed imposing penalties for people who pressure election workers, a key cause of Democrats in state legislatures after conspiracy theorists targeted voting officials after the 2020 presidential election.

In Minnesota, Simon said he also wants to increase penalties against threatening or interfering with election workers. He said he’ll push a range of other reforms, including pre-registering high schoolers so they can quickly join the voting rolls upon turning 18. Younger voters lean Democratic, but Simon said he’s not trying to promote his party.

He said he merely wants to make the electorate more reflective of the population, a goal he also pushed when the statehouse was split between Republicans and Democrats.

“These are reforms that will benefit everyone,” he said.

Associated Press writers Joey Cappelletti in Lansing, Michigan, and Julie Carr Smyth in Columbus, Ohio, contributed to this report.

The legislation, which Democrats and Republicans have been working on since the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the Capitol, is the most significant policy response so far to the attack and Trump’s aggressive efforts to upend the popular vote.

Led by Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine and Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, along with members of the House Jan. 6 panel, the bipartisan legislation was added to a massive year-end spending bill that was unveiled early Tuesday and will be voted on this week.

The bill would amend the 19th century law that governs, along with the U.S. Constitution, how states and Congress certify electors and declare presidential election winners, ensuring that the popular vote from each state is protected from manipulation and that Congress does not arbitrarily decide presidential elections when it meets to count the votes every four years.

Supporters in both chambers — Democrats and some Republicans — have pushed to pass an overhaul before the start of the next Congress and ahead of the 2024 presidential campaign cycle, as Trump has announced that he is running again. More than a dozen GOP senators have publicly backed the legislation, including Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

“We are now one step closer to protecting our democracy and preventing another January 6th,” said Senate Rules Committee Chairwoman Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., who moved the bill through her committee.

A look at what the bill would do:

CLARIFY THE VICE PRESIDENT’S ROLE

Lawmakers and legal experts have long said the 1887 law is vague and vulnerable to abuse, and Democrats saw Trump’s efforts to overturn his defeat ahead of Jan. 6, 2021, as a final straw.

Supporters of the Republican former president attacked the Capitol that day, echoing his false claims of widespread election fraud, interrupting the congressional certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s victory and calling for Vice President Mike Pence’s death because he wouldn’t try to block Biden from becoming president.

The bill clarifies that the vice president has a purely ceremonial role presiding over the certification every Jan. 6 after a presidential election and that he or she has no power to determine the results of the election — an effort to make that point emphatically in the law after Trump and some of his allies put massive pressure on Pence. Pence resisted those entreaties, but many lawmakers were concerned that the law wasn’t definitive enough.

The legislation states that the vice president “shall have no power to solely determine, accept, reject, or otherwise adjudicate or resolve disputes” over the counting of electors in Congress.

MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT TO OBJECT STATE’S ELECTORAL VOTES

The legislation would also make it more difficult for lawmakers to object to a particular state’s electoral votes. Under current law, just one member of the Senate and one member of the House need to lodge an objection to automatically trigger votes in both chambers on whether to overturn or discard a state’s presidential election results. The bill would significantly raise that threshold, requiring a fifth of each chamber to object before votes would be held.

Raising the threshold for objections will do away with a partisan tradition that has rankled members on both sides. Democrats have objected the last three times that Republicans were elected — twice against George W. Bush and once against Trump. But in each of those cases the Democratic candidate had already conceded the election loss, and Trump to this day falsely claims he defeated Biden.

In 2021, Republicans objected to Biden’s electoral votes in Arizona and Pennsylvania, triggering votes in both chambers after the Capitol was cleared. The House and the Senate voted overwhelmingly to certify Biden’s win in those states, but members in both parties worried the process was too vulnerable to manipulation.

The House-passed version of the bill, written by Democrats and Republicans on the Jan. 6 panel, would have raised the threshold for a successful objection to a third of each chamber. But the final legislation is much closer to the Senate version overall, an effort to ensure that GOP senators backing the bill would stay supportive.

NO FAKE OR ‘ALTERNATE’ ELECTORS

The bill would ensure that there is only one slate of electors, a response to Trump allies’ unsuccessful efforts to create alternate, illegitimate slates of Trump electors in states that Biden narrowly won in 2020.

Each state’s governor would be required to submit the electors, which are sent under a formal process to Congress and opened at the rostrum during the joint session. Congress could not accept a slate submitted by a different official, so there could not be competing lists of electors from one state.

The bill would establish legal processes if any of those electors are challenged by a presidential candidate.

SAFEGUARDS FOR ‘CATASTROPHIC’ EVENTS

The legislation would revise language in current law that wasn’t used during the 2020 election but that lawmakers think could be abused. Current law allows state legislatures to override the popular vote in their states by calling a “failed election,” but the term is not defined under the law.

The bill says a state could only move its presidential election day if there are “extraordinary and catastrophic” events, such as natural disasters, that necessitate that.

House lawmakers and legal experts have argued that language is too vague and have proposed that a judge should also have to sign off on any such delay. But the final version of the bill does not require that.

The Texas secretary of state’s office released the final report from a sprawling audit of the 2020 election Monday, publishing its findings for the four counties selected for the probe: Collin, Dallas, Harris and Tarrant.

The audit also found major issues with Harris County, few issues with Tarrant County and indicated that Collin County should be held up as the standard for how to conduct an election in Texas.

“Texas has some of the strongest and most effective transparency measures in the country when it comes to administering and auditing elections,” Texas Secretary of State John Scott stated in a news release. “The Texas forensic election audit – which is, by far, the largest undertaken in the nation to date – demonstrates how these measures can and should be used to make sure Texas voters can have confidence in the outcome of any given election, as well as which areas counties need to address to restore confidence going forward.”

Click here to read the 360-page audit and here to read more from our partners at The Dallas Morning News.

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

The lawsuit filed late Friday by Lake centers on long lines and other difficulties that people experienced while voting on Election Day in Maricopa County. The challenge filed in Maricopa County Superior Court also alleges hundreds of thousands of ballots were illegally cast, but there’s no evidence that’s true.

Lake has refused to acknowledge that she lost to Hobbs by more than 17,000 votes.

The Donald Trump-endorsed gubernatorial candidate has bombarded Maricopa County with complaints, largely related to a problem with printers at some vote centers that led to ballots being printed with markings that were too light to be read by the on-site tabulators.

Lines backed up in some polling places, fueling Republican suspicions that some supporters were unable to cast a ballot, though there’s no evidence it affected the outcome. County officials say everyone was able to vote and all legal ballots were counted.

Lake sued Maricopa County officials and Hobbs in her current role as Arizona’s secretary of state.

Sophia Solis, a spokesperson for the secretary of state’s office, said Lake’s lawsuit was being reviewed but had no other comment on the filing.

Jason Berry, a Maricopa County spokesperson, declined to comment on Lake’s request to throw out the county’s election results in the governor’s race. But he said the county “respects the election contest process and looks forward to sharing facts about the administration of the 2022 general election and our work to ensure every legal voter had an opportunity to cast their ballot.”

Hobbs in a post on her Twitter account called the lawsuit “Lake’s latest desperate attempt to undermine our democracy and throw out the will of the voters.” She posted a statement from her campaign manager that called the lawsuit a “sham” and said her camp remained focused on “getting ready to hit the ground running on Day One of Katie Hobbs’ administration.”

Lake’s lawsuit says Republicans were disproportionately affected by the problems in Maricopa County because they outvoted Democrats on Election Day 3-1. GOP leaders had urged their voters to wait until Election Day to vote.

In late November, Lake filed a public records lawsuit demanding Maricopa County hand over documents related to the election. She was seeking to identify voters who may have had trouble casting a ballot, such as people who checked in at more than one vote center or those who returned a mail ballot and also checked in at a polling place.

During the summer, a federal judge also rejected a request by Lake and Mark Finchem, the defeated Republican candidate for secretary of state, to require hand counting of all ballots during the November election.

The judge has since sanctioned lawyers representing Lake and Finchem, saying they “made false, misleading, and unsupported factual assertions” in their lawsuit. The lawyers told the court that their claims were “legally sound and supported by strong evidence.”

Hobbs in her role as secretary of state has petitioned a court to begin an automatic statewide recount required by law in three races decided by less than half a percentage point.

The race for attorney general was one of the closest contests in state history, with Democrat Kris Mayes leading Republican Abe Hamadeh by just 510 votes out of 2.5 million cast.

The races for superintendent of public instruction and a state legislative seat in the Phoenix suburbs will also be recounted, but the margins are much larger.

In arguments Wednesday, both liberal and conservative members of the high court appeared to take issue with the main thrust of a challenge asking them to essentially eliminate the power of state courts to strike down legislature-drawn, gerrymandered congressional districts on grounds that they violate state constitutions.

Republicans from North Carolina who brought the case to the high court argue that a provision of the U.S. Constitution known as the elections clause gives state lawmakers virtually total control over the “times, places and manner” of congressional elections, including redistricting, cutting state courts out of the process.

The Republicans are advancing a concept called the “independent legislature theory,” never before adopted by the Supreme Court but cited approvingly by four conservative justices.

A broad ruling could threaten hundreds of election laws, require separate rules for federal and state elections on the same ballot and lead to new efforts to redraw congressional districts to maximize partisan advantage.

“This is a theory with big consequences,” Justice Elena Kagan said, allowing for the “most extreme forms of gerrymandering from legislatures.”

Justice Amy Coney Barrett said the outcome sought by North Carolina Republicans would leave judges with “difficult lines to draw.”

The court’s decision in the North Carolina case also might suggest how the justices would deal with another part of the Constitution — not at issue in the current case — that gives legislatures the authority to decide how presidential electors are appointed. That provision, the electors clause, was central to efforts to try to overturn the outcome of the 2020 presidential election in several closely contested states.

The North Carolina state Supreme Court struck down districts drawn by Republicans who control the legislature because they heavily favored Republicans in the highly competitive state. The court-drawn map used in last month’s elections for Congress produced a 7-7 split between Democrats and Republicans.

North Carolina is among six states in recent years in which state courts have ruled that overly partisan redistricting for Congress violated their state constitutions. The others are Florida, Maryland, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

State courts have become the only legal forum for challenging partisan congressional maps since the Supreme Court ruled in 2019 that those lawsuits cannot be brought in federal court.

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the court and joined by four other conservative justices, noted that state courts remained open. “Provisions in state statutes and state constitutions can provide standards and guidance for state courts to apply,” Roberts wrote, in an opinion joined by Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Clarence Thomas.

But Alito, Gorsuch and Thomas wrote in March that they would have allowed the Republican-drawn map to be used this year. Alito wrote for the three justices that “there must be some limit on the authority of state courts to countermand actions taken by state legislatures when they are prescribing rules for the conduct of federal elections. I think it is likely that the applicants would succeed in showing that the North Carolina Supreme Court exceeded those limits.”

Kavanaugh has separately written about the need for federal courts to police the actions of state courts when it comes to federal elections, citing an opinion by three conservatives in the Bush v. Gore case that settled the 2000 presidential election. Thomas was one of the three justices on that 22-year-old opinion, but the court decided the case on other grounds.

In North Carolina, Republican lawmakers won’t have to wait for the court’s decision to produce a new congressional map that is expected to have more Republican districts.

Even as Democrats won half the state’s 14 congressional seats, Republicans seized control of the state Supreme Court. Two newly elected Republican justices give them a 5-2 edge that makes it more likely than not that the court would uphold a map with more Republican districts.

The Democratic National Committee’s rule-making arm made the move to strip Iowa from the position it has held for more than four decades after technical meltdowns sparked chaos and marred results of the state’s 2020 caucus. The change also comes after a long push by some of the party’s top leaders to start choosing a president in states that are less white, especially given the importance of Black voters as Democrats’ most loyal electoral base.

Discussion on prioritizing diversity drew such impassioned reaction at the committee gathering in Washington that DNC chair Jaime Harrison wiped away tears as committee member Donna Brazile suggested that Democrats had spent years failing to fight for Black voters: “Do you know what it’s like to live on a dirt road? Do you know what it’s like to try to find running water that is clean?”

“Do you know what it’s like to wait and see if the storm is going to pass you by and your roof is still intact?” Brazile asked. “That’s what this is about.”

Following Biden’s recommendations, the committee also opted to have New Hampshire and Nevada jointly vote second, a week after South Carolina, followed by Georgia and Michigan, two critical battleground states that would round out the top five in subsequent weeks. All the proposed contests would likely be held in February 2024.

US Elections

Congress Nov 30, 2022

Hakeem Jeffries Elected to Replace Nancy Pelosi, Becoming the First Black Lawmaker to Lead a Major Party

Nov 29, 2022

McConnell Suggests Trump Is ‘Highly Unlikely' to Win Presidential Election Due to Ye, Fuentes Dinner

That’s a change from the current calendar, with Iowa holding the first-in-the-nation caucuses since 1972, followed by New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary since 1920. Nevada and South Carolina have gone next since the 2008 presidential election, when Democrats last did a major overhaul of their primary calendar.

The move will still have to be approved by the full DNC in a vote likely early next year, but it will almost certainly follow the rule-making committee’s lead.

The revamped schedule could largely be moot for 2024 if Biden opts to seek a second term, but may remake Democratic presidential cycles in 2028 and beyond. The president has said for months that he intends to run again, and White House aides have begun making staffing discussions for his likely reelection campaign, even though no final decision has been made.

Biden wrote in a letter to rules committee members on Thursday that the party should scrap “restrictive” caucuses altogether because their rules on in-person participation can sometimes exclude working-class and other voters. He told also told party leaders privately that he’d like to see South Carolina go first to better ensure that voters of color aren’t marginalized as Democrats choose a presidential nominee.

Four of the five states now poised to start the party’s primary are presidential battlegrounds, meaning the eventual Democratic winner would be able to lay groundwork in important general election locales. That’s especially true for Michigan and Georgia, which both voted for Donald Trump in 2016 before flipping to Biden in 2020. The exception is South Carolina, which hasn’t gone Democratic in a presidential race since 1976.

The first five voting states would be positioned to cast ballots before Super Tuesday, the day when much of the rest of the country holds primaries. That gives the early states outsize influence since White House hopefuls struggling to raise money or gain political traction often drop out before visiting much of the rest of the country.

Scott Brennan, a rules committee member from Iowa, said “small, rural states” like his “must have a voice in the presidential nominating process.”

“Democrats cannot forget about entire groups of voters in the heart of the Midwest without doing significant damage to the party in newer generations,” Brennan said.

The Republican National Committee has already decided to keep Iowa’s caucus as the first contest in its 2024 presidential primary, ensuring that GOP White House hopefuls — which include Trump — have continued to frequently campaign there.

House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, South Carolina’s lone congressional Democrat and one of Biden’s top supporters in Congress, said the president called him Thursday to inform him of his push to move his state up.

“I didn’t ask to be first,” Clyburn said. “It was his idea to be first.”

Clyburn’s endorsement of Biden in 2020 boosted the candidate’s flagging presidential campaign just ahead of South Carolina’s primary, which he won big. That helped Biden shake off early losses in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada and eventually take the White House.

“He knows what South Carolina did for him, and he’s demonstrated that time and time again, by giving respect to South Carolina,” Clyburn said.

Still, the vote by the rules committee has faced serious pushback, with some states vowing to ignore the changes altogether. That’s despite the panel approving language saying states could lose all of their delegates to the party’s national convention if they attempt to violate new rules.

Iowa and New Hampshire have said laws in their states mandate them going before others, and they intend to abide by those, not DNC decrees.

Nevada, with its heavily Hispanic population, has balked at sharing the second-place slot with New Hampshire, a state 2,500 miles away.

Nevada committee member Artie Blanco’s voice cracked as she argued against the change.

“If we want to build a strong relationship with Latinos,” Blanco said, “then Nevada must stand alone on a date and not have to share that date.”

___

Associated Press writer Meg Kinnard contributed from Columbia, S.C.

Lawmakers are on track to pass federal protections for same-sex marriage. And there’s a call for stricter gun laws again after mass shootings, but that’s unlikely to pass before year’s end.

“This is a choice to allow this to continue to happen,” said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Connecticut, on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

And further efforts on voting rights.

“We need to look at the John R. Lewis voting rights act. I’m not going to get off of that,” said Rep. James Clyburn, R-South Carolina, on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

As Democrats work to get the final passage of bills, Republicans in the House will be busy choosing new leadership as committees will flip into Republican control. Some Republican representatives could hold critical positions.

“That’s a significant shift in terms of the clout that Texans will wield in directing some key committees on the hill,” said SMU Political Science Professor Matthew Wilson.

Wilson says Fort Worth Rep. Kay Granger is poised to chair the House Appropriations Committee.

“Appropriations is truly one of the key committees in the House. It is widely regarded as a power committee. So chairing Appropriations, which is what Kay granger will do, puts her in a position to wield considerable influence over the spending of federal dollars,” said Wilson.

Austin Rep. Michael McCaul is in line to head the Foreign Relations Committee. Fort Worth Rep. Roger Williams has announced his run to chair the small business committee. Houston Rep. Dan Crenshaw is running to chair Homeland Security.

So, with just weeks to go, it’s shaping up to be a busy December for members of Congress with big changes ahead in 2023.

Instead, Tuesday night’s disappointing results for the GOP are raising new questions about Trump’s appeal and the future of a party that has fully embraced him, seemingly at its peril, while at the same time giving new momentum to his most potent potential rival.

Indeed, some allies were calling on Trump to delay his planned announcement next week, saying the party’s full focus needs to be on Georgia, where Trump-backed football great Herschel Walker’s effort to unseat Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock is headed to a runoff that could determine control of the Senate once again.

“I’ll be advising him that he move his announcement until after the Georgia runoff,” said former Trump adviser Jason Miller, who spent the night with the former president at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida. “Georgia needs to be the focus of every Republican in the country right now,” he said.

Trump sought to use the midterms as an opportunity to prove his enduring political influence after losing the White House in 2020. He endorsed more than 330 candidates in races up and down the ballot, often elevating inexperienced and deeply flawed candidates. He reveled in their primary victories. But many of their positions, including echoing Trump’s lies about a stolen 2020 election and embracing hardline views on abortion, were out of step with the political mainstream.

Trump did notch some big wins Tuesday, particularly in Ohio, where his pick for the Senate, “Hillbilly Elegy” author JD Vance, sailed to easy victory after Trump’s endorsement catapulted him to the front of a crowded primary pack. In North Carolina, Rep. Ted Budd, an early Trump pick, kept an open Senate seat in GOP hands.

But Trump lost some of the night’s biggest prizes, particularly in Pennsylvania, where Dr. Mehmet Oz, who only narrowly won his Senate primary with Trump’s backing, lost to Democrat John Fetterman. Trump-backed candidates also lost governors’ races in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Maryland, and a Senate race in New Hampshire, though Trump seemed to celebrate the latter, bashing Republican Dan Bolduc for trying to moderate his stances by backing off his embrace of Trump’s election lies.

decision 2022 Nov 9, 2022

Pivotal Georgia Senate Race Between Warnock and Walker Headed to a Runoff, Secretary of State Says

Nov 9, 2022

McCarthy's Quest to Be Speaker Collides With GOP Failures

“Had he stayed strong and true, he would have won, easily,” Trump said on his social media network. “Lessons Learned!!!” (Trump also cheered the loss of Colorado Republican Senate hopeful Joe O’Dea, who had said he thought it was time for the party to move on from Trump.)

Other high-stakes races in Arizona and Nevada remained too early to call.

Indeed, the Republicans’ biggest victory of the night came in Florida, where Gov. Ron DeSantis cruised to reelection, cementing his status as a rising national Republican star as he eyes his own potential 2024 run.

“I have only begun to fight,” he told supporters in his victory speech.

While Republicans still appear well positioned to flip the House, and could ultimately take the Senate, too, those who had believed frustrations with record inflation, combined with President Joe Biden’s low approval ratings, would deliver swift and decisive victories were pointing fingers in the former president’s direction. The night’s message, they argued: The American people want to move on.

“I mean, we had a historic opportunity and Trump’s recruitment of unelectable candidates blew it for us,” said Scott Reed, a veteran Republican strategist. “Trump’s now lost three elections in a row for the Republican Party and it’s time to snap out of this foolishness.”

Reed argued the party “had everything going for us: money, the issue agenda, Biden being in the tank,” but said Trump’s efforts to keep himself in the spotlight by teasing a run in the race’s final stretch “obviously worked up a lot of independents and Democrats to turn out and vote.”

Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a longtime Trump friend and adviser-turned-critic, who is considering his own run for president in 2024, said Republicans “have a fundamental decision to make.”

“We lost in ‘18. We lost in ‘20. We lost in ’21 in Georgia. And now in ’22 we’re going to net lose governorships, we’re not going to pick up the number of seats in the House that we thought and we may not win the Senate despite a president who has a 40% job approval,” he said. “There’s only one person to blame for that and that’s Donald Trump.”

He blamed Trump for elevating deeply flawed candidates, who won their primaries but struggled in the general election.

‘The only animating factor (for him) in determining an endorsement is, ’Do you believe the 2020 election was stolen or don’t you?'” Christie said. “It’s not, ‘Can you raise money?’ It’s not, ‘Do you have an articulatable vision for the future of your state or your district?’ It’s not evidence of past success in communicating to voters. It is a completely self-centered determination.”

Trump, meanwhile, insisted publicly he was happy with the results.

“While in certain ways yesterday’s election was somewhat disappointing, from my personal standpoint it was a very big victory – 219 WINS and 16 Losses in the General – Who has ever done better than that?” he wrote on his Truth Social network Wednesday afternoon.

His spokesman Taylor Budowich also touted Trump’s endorsement record, and said, “As President Trump looks to the future, he will continue to champion his America First agenda that won overwhelmingly at the ballot box last night.”

But Republican strategist David Urban, a former Trump adviser, said the Trump brand is wounded no matter what the former president says.

misinformation Nov 9, 2022

Misinformation Spreads on Arizona, Pennsylvania Contests After Election

decision 2022 Nov 9, 2022

President Joe Biden Says He's Prepared to Work With Republicans as ‘Red Wave' Falls Short

“Of course, he’s going to claim victory, right? The president touts an accomplishment record that includes victories in uncontested races. He can say whatever he wants. But how do people feel in America? I think people feel not great about the Trump brand right now,” Urban said. “It’s bad.”

Some now worry that if Trump goes forward with his planned announcement next week, he could pave the way for a rerun of Republicans’ 2021 losses in Georgia by dominating the race.

Former Trump press secretary Kayleigh McEnany, who now works for Fox News, advised on air that Trump should hold off on an announcement until after the Georgia Senate runoff.

“I think he needs to put it on pause,” she said. Asked whether Trump should campaign in the state, she said: “I think we’ve got to make strategic calculations. Gov. DeSantis, I think he should be welcomed to the state, given what happened last night. You’ve got to look at the realities on the ground.”

Budowich did not respond to questions about such efforts, but Trump seemed to throw cold water on the advice.

“We had tremendous success,” he told Fox News Digital Wednesday. “Why would anything change?”

Trump’s setbacks, meanwhile, were giving new hope to the long list of potential rivals who have been quietly waiting in the wings and now face the decision of whether to run, too.

That includes DeSantis, who emerged as the night’s obvious winner. “DeFUTURE,” The New York Post declared. In addition to his wide margin of victory, DeSantis carried Democratic stronghold Miami-Dade, and did so without Trump’s endorsement. (Though Trump did tell reporters he’d voted for the governor days after insulting him as “Ron DeSanctimonious.”)

“DeSantis comes out of the election with lot of momentum,” said GOP strategist Alex Conant. “Trump has been weak for a long time but it wasn’t clear who the alternative was. … For the first time, Trump really has a formidable rival within the party.”

Even some Democrats conceded DeSantis’ strength.

Miami-based Democratic strategist Jose Parra said the Trump rival enters the 2024 conversation with “a bunch of wind in his sails” after stronger-than-expected performance across the state — especially in south Florida’s Miami-Dade County.

Speaking at the White House on Wednesday, Biden said his “intention” is to run again. But noting the emerging competition between Trump and DeSantis, he said it would be “fun watching them take on each other.”

The measures curtail the use of prison labor in Alabama, Tennessee and Vermont. In Oregon, “yes” on its anti-slavery ballot initiative was leading, but was too early to call.

In Louisiana, a former slave-holding state, voters rejected a ballot question known as Amendment 7 that asked whether they supported a constitutional amendment to prohibit the use of involuntary servitude in the criminal justice system.

The initiatives on the ballot Tuesday don’t force immediate changes in the states’ prisons, but they may invite legal challenges over the practice of coercing prisoners to work under threat of sanctions or loss of privileges if they refuse the work.

The results were celebrated among anti-slavery advocates, including those pushing to further amend the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits enslavement and involuntary servitude except as a form of criminal punishment. More than 150 years after enslaved Africans and their descendants were released from bondage through ratification of the 13th Amendment, the slavery exception continues to permit the exploitation of low-cost labor by incarcerated individuals.

“Tonight, voters in Oregon and other states have come together across party lines to say that this stain must be removed from state constitutions,” Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley, a Democrat, told The Associated Press.

“Now, it is time for all Americans to come together and say that it must be struck from the U.S. Constitution. There should be no exceptions to a ban on slavery,” he said.

Coinciding with the creation of the Juneteenth federal holiday last year, Merkley and Rep. Nikema Williams, D-Georgia, reintroduced legislation to revise the 13th Amendment to end the slavery exception. If it wins approval in Congress, the constitutional amendment must be ratified by three-fourths of U.S. states.

After Tuesday’s vote, more than a dozen states have constitutions that include language permitting slavery and involuntary servitude for prisoners. Several other states have no constitutional language for or against the use of forced prison labor.

Voters in Colorado became the first to approve removal of slavery exception language from the state constitution in 2018, followed by Nebraska and Utah two years later.

The movement to end or regulate the use of prison labor has existed for decades, since the time when former Confederate states sought ways to maintain the use of chattel slavery after the Civil War. Southern states used racist laws, referred to as “Black codes,” to criminalize, imprison and re-enslave Black Americans over benign behavior.

Today, prison labor is a multibillion-dollar practice. By comparison, workers can make pennies on the dollar. And prisoners who refuse to work can be denied privileges such as phone calls and visits with family, as well as face solitary confinement, all punishments that are eerily similar to those used during antebellum slavery.

“The 13th Amendment didn’t actually abolish slavery — what it did was make it invisible,” Bianca Tylek, an anti-slavery advocate and the executive director of the criminal justice advocacy group Worth Rises, told the AP in an interview ahead of Election Day.

She said passage of the ballot initiatives, especially in red states like Alabama, “is a great signal for what’s possible at the federal level.”

“There is a big opportunity here, in this moment,” Tylek said.

It was the second decisive statewide victory for Newsom in barely a year. In September 2021, he easily beat back an attempt to kick him out of office that was fueled by anger over his pandemic policies. The failed recall solidified Newsom’s political power in California, leaving him free to focus on the future — which many expect will include a run for the White House.

“I think that he becomes one of the highest-profile Democrats in the country, given there is very likely going to be divided government in Washington D.C., and the Democrats will be looking for any and all allies to promote their agenda,” said Matt Barreto, a UCLA political science professor. “And Gov. Newsom will have a very large platform from California to do that.”

It was an expected outcome in the nation’s most populous state, where there are nearly twice as many registered Democratic voters as Republicans. The GOP candidate, state Sen. Brian Dahle, could not raise enough money to run an effective campaign. Dahle, a farmer from the state’s rural northwest corner who also owns a trucking company, spent the final weeks of the campaign trying to draw attention by driving a semi truck around the state with a large campaign banner.

abortion Nov 4, 2022

California Governor Pardons Abortion Activist From 1940s

With no political threats at home, Newsom has spent the past year signing a raft of liberal legislation that could help him win over Democratic voters in a contested presidential primary. That included enacting more than a dozen laws aimed at making California a sanctuary for women in other states seeking abortions now that the U.S. Supreme Court has overturned Roe v. Wade.

He ordered state regulators to ban the sale of most new gas-powered cars by 2035. His budgets have paid for every 4-year-old to go to kindergarten for free and will cover the health care costs of all low income immigrants in California who are living in the United States without legal permission.

But a potential Newsom presidential campaign would have to answer for a host of California’s most stubborn problems, including an ever expanding homeless population and an increase in crime that has contributed to a general sense of unease among voters. Meanwhile, soaring inflation has only increased the state’s high cost of living, contributing to California’s first population decline and the loss of a congressional seat.

Newsom has pledged to tackle some of those issues immediately in his second term, vowing to call a special session of the state Legislature next month to pass a new tax on oil company profits as a way to combat the state’s record-high gas prices. But Newsom’s next term will begin with state tax collections falling below expectations, setting up a potential round of unpopular budget cuts.

Nationally, Newsom has sought the role of party messenger, using some of his campaign money to pay for ads in Florida and Texas targeting those state’s conservative governors. Newsom has said repeatedly his goal is to revamp the Democratic Party’s strategy, urging others to follow his example of a more aggressive style.

The constant jabs at DeSantis, Abbott and other leading Republicans has only increased speculation about Newsom’s future. Some have floated his name as a potential replacement for President Joe Biden in 2024 or a run in 2028. Newsom has repeatedly denied both, saying he backs Biden and wants Vice President Kamala Harris, a friend and fellow Californian, to be president.

During last month’s only debate of the governor’s race Newsom promised to serve all four years if once reelected — a promise many politicians have made and broken in the past.

As for his next term as governor, Newsom has said he will focus on the extremes: “extreme drought, extreme weather, extreme polarization in our body politic as it relates to preserving and protecting democracy.”

“The rights revolution has been rolled back in real time in so many red states, all of those things are very consequential,” Newsom said after a debate last month. “And this state has more to lose, more to gain, than any other state in the country.”

From inflation to gun control and abortion rights, experts say the 2022 midterms are one for the history books.

NBC 5 gained some insight from viewers on how this is all setting the tone for the day and what is bringing them to the polls this year.

A survey was posted to this site in October with a big question: What’s at stake for you this midterm?

What ranked top of mind for North Texas may or may not be surprising. The number one issue viewers picked in our survey is the future of the country’s democracy, then the economy, abortion, and gun policy in that order.

We looked over the results with UT Arlington political science professor, Thomas Marshall.

He says this differs slightly from the statewide polls where immigration – which motivates Republicans more than Democrats — and the economy, topped the list.

“You look at the issues that are important to voters, a lot of it is what’s been in the news lately,” he said. “The real pocket book issue, which motivates a lot of voters, is definitely the economy. Eight to 9% inflation is unprecedented in recent times.”

But when you look at other surveys, you can see an interesting contrast between parties in some ways. A recent one conducted by Dallas-based Lisa W. Miller & Associates, a consumer insight and consulting firm, shows Republicans’ and Independents’ financial optimism has eroded over the last year, dropping significantly since this time last year.

But Democrats’ financial optimism has held steady, with some improvement since last fall.

Marshall teaches a class on campaigns, elections, and public opinion. He says presidents usually get judged on their performance and the state of public opinion in their first two years, which voters will take into account at the polls.

“Voter sentiment is unusually negative this year. And what’s driving that is the inflation rate. It’s hard for an unpopular incumbents party to deal with a high inflation rate or a weak economy that’s dominating a lot of national news and a lot of voters experience,” he said. “I think what we’re going to see are a slightly lower turnout and enthusiasm gap. And, if all the polls are correct, so far a pretty bad night for Democrats and a pretty good night for Republicans.”

When voters head to the polls, keep in mind there are a lot of races in Texas, including many voters who might not know much about.

“There are long ballots in Texas judges are on the ballot, local officials are on the ballot, and lots of statewide candidates are on the ballot,” said Marshall. “There’s very little news coverage, they don’t have big advertising budgets, so it’s not surprising that many voters rely on their best available shortcut when they’re standing there at the polls – which is they vote for their own party’s candidates.”

Do what research you can. But keep in mind, this is only the second election in Texas where straight-ticket voting is not available on the ballot anymore so be prepared to spend a little extra time at the polls on Tuesday.

The Justice Department plans to monitor polls in two dozen states across the country to ensure no one intimidates voters or otherwise meddles with Tuesday’s midterm elections.

The department’s Civil Rights Division selected 64 jurisdictions in 24 states, including Alaska, Florida, Georgia and Nevada, for oversight in both the general election and early voting. The division routinely monitors elections in the field, starting in 1965 when Congress passed the Voting Rights Act.

In Texas, Dallas County, along with two other state counties, Harris and Waller County, will have monitors placed at polling locations on Tuesday.

DOJ monitored polls in 18 states and 44 cities and counties in 2020, by comparison.

To read more, click here.

There is also a huge push to get voters out the door because early numbers in key North Texas counties and across this state are down significantly from the 2018 midterm election, according to the Texas secretary of state.

Turnout in Texas was 53% in 2018, but this year, it’s expected to be closer to 35%.

Dallas County’s early voting turnout was 23% lower than in 2018. It’s the biggest decrease among North Texas counties.

Early voting ended on Friday, which was a rainy day, and tends to history affect voter turnout.

Collin County Elections Administrator Bruce Sherbet spoke to NBC 5 about the numbers differing from 2018.

“It was an anomaly of an election.  It was more tracking like a presidential turnout.  We set all kind of records in that election,” said Collin County Elections Administrator Bruce Sherbet.

Sherbet points to the high interest in the senate race between Senator Ted Cruz and former El Paso Representative Beto O’Rourke.

“It really had a lot of interest from the voters.  That we could tell that from the first day of voting once we started early voting. This one we don’t get the same sense of that. Now the turnout hasn’t been bad, it’s just not the same kind of turnout we had four years ago,” added Sherbet.

HOW TO VOTE

Polls are open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Election Day.

Photo ID is required. Voters who do not present valid ID are allowed to cast a provisional ballot, but must provide valid ID to their voter registrar’s office at a later date in order for their ballot to be counted.

Voters who are unable to provide a form of valid photo ID can sign an affidavit attesting to that fact and cast a ballot. Valid forms of ID are listed here.

Heads up: In 2020, some counties offered drive-thru voting. In 2022, drive-thru voting is no longer permitted.

Voters must also now must provide a driver’s license number or the last 4 digits of their Social Security number on applications for mail ballots and on completed mail ballots. This was not required in 2020.

In 2022, new rules for people who assist voters who need help filling out their ballots require the person providing that assistance to recite an oath stating that they did not pressue the voter. The rules also require the helper to fill out new paperwork disclosing their relationship, if any, to the voter.

Ballot tracking now available statewide. It was previously only available in certain counties.

You can also click here to access the 2022 Plan Your Vote tool by NBC News to help you plan your day.

BIG TEXAS RACES

There are big races at stake in Texas.

The face-off between Republican incumbent Greg Abbott, who is seeking a third term as governor, and Democrat challenger Beto O’Rourke is the big one for Texans that has dominated headlines for the past year.

As voters prepare to elect their next governor, both candidates have door knocking and traveling across parts of North Texas and beyond in the final days of their campaigns, which has already been labeled the most expensive in Texas history.

Low turnout in Dallas County doesn’t bode well for O’Rourke, who has said he needs to get strong numbers in Democratic cities and to build on gains in Tarrant County in 2018 and 2020.

There’s also a rematch between Republican Dan Patrick and Democrat Mike Collier for Texas Lt. Governor, who both competed for the same title back in 2018.

The race for Texas Attorney General pits Republican Ken Paxton to fight for his long held position against Democratic challenger Rochell Mercedes Garza.

Click here for more information on the midterm elections in Texas, who is on the ballot, and what important propositions voters will need to cast a decision on.

Meantime, first lady Dr. Jill Biden was in the state over the weekend addressing a congregation in Houston and encouraging everyone to get out and vote on Tuesday.

“We must speak up for justice and democracy. We must fight for families who are struggling. We must vote,” she said.

SCHOOL CLOSURES

Parents should also be aware of changes on Election Day that could affect their child’s school.

Many schools are being turned into polling places so there’s a safety concern with allowing so many people on campus.

That’s why several Texas schools and districts will be closed to students on Tuesday for election day.

The student holiday impacts some Dallas and Forth Worth ISD campuses, along with Keller, Garland, Richardson, and Birdville school districts.

Not all local schools are cancelling classes so parents will need to check their student’s calendar.

HOW TO WATCH

Plan to watch NBC  5 on Tuesday night for complete midterm coverage. We’ll have crews across Texas for all the big races.

We’ll also be live streaming for two full hours. Find us on the Roku channel – look for NBC Dallas Fort Worth News or channel 135 in your guide.

You’ll find us in a few other places like Samsung TV Plus and Fire TV, too.

Just go to www.nbcdfw.com/everywhere for information on how to find us on your favorite device.

At the Handley Meadowbrook Community Center in Fort Worth, voters are showing up.

But there are no lines and no wait.

“Nothing like that. Easy to get in,” said realtor Adrainne Prince.

Part of the trend could be blamed on early voting starting later in many places than two years ago.

“I think it reflects the fact that the last two electoral cycles have been really high intensity,” SMU political science professor Matthew Wilson said. “In 2020 we had a hotly contested presidential race. In 2018 you had the Beto-mania phenomena.”

The drop in voting suggests a big challenge for Democrats, Wilson said.

“Because I think the Democratic candidates’ only plausible victory story is one where they get this huge surge in turnout from young voters, from minority voters, etcetera.”

Wilson also said the latest polls show the issues of most concern to voters may also favor Republicans.

A University of Texas-Tyler poll shows 56% of Texans believe the state is headed in the “wrong direction.”

But asked about the most important policy facing Texas, 24% said securing the border and 21% said the economy.

Only 10% said reproductive rights were the top issue and 10% said gun control.

The poll of registered Texas voters was taken Oct.17-24 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9%.

With interest in the election still high, we could see a surge in the final few days of early voting — and on Election Day, Nov. 8.

“Vote for who you want to vote for,” George Elkins said outside the Fort Worth community center. “I don’t care if it’s Democrat or Republican.”

The widely debunked film includes surveillance video showing Mark Andrews, his face blurred, depositing five ballots in a drop box in downtown Lawrenceville, a suburb northeast of Atlanta. A voiceover by conservative pundit and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza says: “What you are seeing is a crime. These are fraudulent votes.”

In fact, a state investigation found, Andrews was dropping off ballots for himself, his wife and their three adult children, who all live at the same address. That is legal in Georgia and a state investigator said there was no evidence of wrongdoing by Andrews.

D’Souza’s film uses research from the Texas-based nonprofit True the Vote and suggests that ballot “mules” aligned with Democrats were paid to illegally collect and deliver ballots in Georgia and four other closely watched states. An Associated Press analysis found that it is based on faulty assumptions, anonymous accounts and improper analysis of cellphone location data.

State and federal officials have repeatedly confirmed that there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud during the 2020 election that could have changed the outcome of the presidential race.

The lawsuit names D’Souza and True the Vote, as well as the organization’s executive director Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips, who has served on its board. Both Engelbrecht and Phillips appear throughout the film and served as executive producers and producers, the lawsuit says.

D’Souza did not immediately respond Friday to a request for comment submitted through his website. Engelbrecht and True the Vote have not responded to emails seeking comment, and contact information for Phillips could not be immediately located.

“At all times, Defendants knew that their portrayals of Mr. Andrews were lies, as was the entire narrative of 2000 Mules,” the lawsuit says. “But they have continued to peddle these lies in order to enrich themselves.”

Their social media accounts and website continue to promote the film using Andrews “as an example of a criminal ‘mule,’” the lawsuit says. While Andrews’ face was blurred in the film, video shown when the defendants were interviewed sometimes clearly showed his face and the license plate on his SUV, the lawsuit says.

The false accusations have caused distress for Andrews and his family, the lawsuit says.

“They feel intimidated to vote and have changed how they vote because of that fear,” it says. “They worry that again they will be baselessly accused of election crimes, and that believers in the ‘mules’ theory may recognize and seek reprisal against them, and that they may face physical harm.”

Andrews, who is Black, grew up in Jacksonville, Florida, before federal voting rights laws were passed and his “family taught him that his community and ancestors had fought, marched, and died for the right to vote,” the lawsuit says. Because of the “conspiracy to defame and intimidate him,” the suit says, “he will never again be able to vote without looking over his shoulder.”

Among other things, the lawsuit seeks an unspecified amount in damages and asks that false and defamatory statements about Andrews be removed from any website or social media accounts that the defendants control.

The strategy: Vote in person on Election Day or — for voters who receive a mailed ballot — hold onto it and hand it in at a polling place or election office on Nov. 8.

The plan is based on unfounded conspiracy theories that fraudsters will manipulate voting systems to rig results for Democrats once they have seen how many Republican votes have been returned early. There has been no evidence of any such widespread fraud.

If enough voters are dissuaded from casting ballots early, it could lead to long lines on Election Day and would push back processing of those late-arriving mailed ballots. Those ballots likely would not get counted until the next day or later.

“It just slows everything down,” said Noah Praetz, the former election clerk in Cook County, Illinois, who now advises local election offices on best practices and security. “In many places, if you don’t get mail ballots in hand until Election Day, you are not counting them until after Election Day.”

There is no evidence of widespread fraud, cheating or manipulation of voting machines in the 2020 election. Exhaustive reviews in the states disputed by Trump upheld Democrat Joe Biden’s win, and legal challenges pursued by the former president and his allies were rejected by numerous judges, including ones appointed by Republicans.

That hasn’t stopped conspiracy theories that have spread over the last two years, fueled by Trump, allies including MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell and a crop of Republican candidates seeking office this year. The calls to hold onto ballots until the last minute have grown louder in recent weeks, according to a review of social media accounts by The Associated Press.

“It’s a lot easier to catch any fraud,” Lindell, who has promoted the last-minute voting strategy on podcasts, told the AP in a recent interview. Lindell, through various events, has sought to prove that voting machines were manipulated to favor Biden in 2020.

Trump also has weighed in, saying at a recent rally that voting on Election Day was best because “it’s much harder for them to cheat that way.”

The strategy push by conservatives comes after the use of mailed ballots soared during the 2020 election amid the COVID-19 pandemic. The end of pandemic restrictions, Trump’s attacks on mailed ballots and new voting restrictions in some Republican-led states has led to a decline in the use of mailed ballots this year, but it still remains a popular option for many voters.

Experts say a last-minute crush of ballots could end up creating delays that can be used by a bad actor to undermine confidence in the election.

“It’s an opening for people to begin questioning and stoking mistrust and distrust,” said Chris Piper, former commissioner of the Virginia Department of Elections.

Discouraging early voting and encouraging voters to hold onto their mailed ballots until Election Day runs counter to efforts by most campaigns. Republican and Democratic candidates alike typically want to have as many ballots in hand as possible heading into Election Day so they can focus their efforts on getting stragglers to the polls and persuading undecided voters.

The dueling approaches have resulted in a confusing array of messages for Republican voters.

In Georgia, a recent online flier by one grassroots group read: “Voting in person and on Election Day is the only way to overwhelm the system.” A conservative group in the state, VoterGA, told its members to “protect” their votes by applying for an absentee ballot early and waiting to deliver it until Election Day.

The chair of the state Republican Party, David Shafer, recently tweeted on the party’s official account: “Voting in-person early is just as safe as voting in-person on Election Day!”

The cross-messaging also is hitting Republican voters in Arizona, which has high-stakes races this year for U.S. Senate, governor and secretary of state. Mail voting has been popular there among voters of both parties for years.

State Sen. Wendy Rogers, a Republican who backed a partisan review of 2020 ballots in Maricopa County, told viewers of One America News Network earlier this month that “we need to vote on the last day, the day of Election Day, so they don’t know how much to cheat by.”

But her party’s top candidates — who also have embraced false claims about the 2020 election — have recently tried to counter that strategy.

“If you have a mail-in ballot, I think that you should mail it in. I want people to vote,” Kari Lake, the Republican nominee for governor, told reporters this month. “And vote whatever way you want to vote, but vote.”

Lake has been among those calling for a rollback in mailed ballots and early voting, favoring instead a single day of in-person voting. Blake Masters, the Republican candidate for Senate in Arizona who also has Trump’s support, said it’s fine to vote by mail if that’s what a voter prefers.

“I want to know results on election night,” Masters told reporters earlier this month. “I’m telling people vote in person, if you can. If not, vote early and return via mail. And let’s know the result.”

It’s unclear whether the messaging for Republicans to hold onto their mailed ballots is having an effect. In two politically important states, the return rate for mailed ballots is slower than in previous elections — although it also could mean voters there remain undecided.

In Georgia, about 23% of mailed ballots have been returned with just over two weeks before Election Day compared to about 35% at about the same time in 2020 and almost 37% in 2018. As of Oct. 19 in Wisconsin, 45% of mailed ballots had been returned compared to 56% in at the same point 2020 and 2018.

Some Democrats also have advocated submitting ballots at the last minute — but based more on a political strategy than claims of fraud.

Pam Keith, an attorney, Democratic activist and former congressional candidate in Florida, said she thinks the predictability that Democrats will vote by mail gives Republicans an early hint at turnout levels. That’s why she is advocating for a surge of ballots at the last minute, catching Republicans off guard.

“By voting early, we are showing our hand,” Keith said. “We show what our turnout number is going to be. And if they know that the overwhelming majority of vote-by-mail ballots are in, then they know what they need to do to win.”

Keith’s advice strayed from that of many Democratic candidates, who have encouraged their supporters to vote early and by mail.

For example, some states, like Arizona, only allow caregivers, family members or household members to drop off a ballot for someone else. Other states, like California, allow for a ballot to submitted by anyone chosen by the voter as long as they are not paid per ballot they collect.

A few states require designated agents to sign a document confirming they have the authority to deliver someone’s ballot. And a few states explicitly prohibit dropping off someone else’s ballot. Other states don’t have laws on ballot collection at all.

In total, more than half of states have laws that explicitly allow a third party to return a completed ballot, according to a tally from the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Laws allowing ballot collection are designed to make voting more convenient, and to make it possible for people who can’t travel to deliver a ballot on their own. Political groups and campaigns from both parties have run ballot-collection programs with the goal of boosting turnout and helping older, homebound, disabled or rural voters get their ballots returned.

However, in 2020, when the use of drop boxes spiked because of the coronavirus pandemic, some criticized the practice. Former President Donald Trump and others argued that ballot collection, often pejoratively called “ballot harvesting,” increased the risk that someone would try to illegally vote on someone else’s behalf or coerce them to vote a certain way. Surveys after the 2020 election found that voters who cast ballots for President Joe Biden were far more likely to report voting by mail than voters for Trump.

Election security experts say that voter fraud is rare among all forms of voting, including by mail and at drop boxes. They point to a 2018 congressional election in North Carolina, when a Republican political operative and his staff illegally gathered ballots and forged signatures, as one of the few instances of voter fraud related to ballot collection. That election was overturned.

After the 2020 election, a discredited film claimed without evidence that a multistate network of Democrat-aligned ballot “mules” were paid to illegally collect and drop off ballots in five states. But the film showed no evidence that the individuals it showed on surveillance tapes were part of a ballot scheme, and a state investigation found that at least one person featured in the film was legally dropping off ballots of family members. The film also pointed to cellphone geolocation data, which experts say is not precise enough to identify whether someone used a drop box or simply traveled near it. Drop boxes are frequently placed intentionally in public, high-traffic spaces.

An Associated Press survey in May 2022 found that among states that used drop boxes in the 2020 presidential election, none reported instances of drop boxes being involved in fraud that could have affected the results.

More Decision 2022

Oct 14, 2022

Here's How Mail-In and Absentee Ballots Are Verified

politics Oct 17, 2022

Your Choice. Your Voice. Your Vote: Tell Us What's at Stake for You This Midterm

The Dallas County Elections Department is holding a drive-through voter registration drive on Oct. 11. The office at 1460 Round Table Drive in Dallas will be open from 7 a.m. to midnight.

Everyone is encouraged to register to vote or update their voter registration information before the deadline.

Voter Registration Applications can be downloaded at DallasCountyVotes.org and are also available at many post offices, libraries, and Texas Department of Public Safety offices. Applications must be returned to the Dallas County Elections Department office at 1520 Round Table Drive on or before Oct. 11. Applications returned by mail must be postmarked by Oct. 11. 

The Texas Secretary of State tweeted on Oct. 6 that so far, more than 17.6 million Texans have registered to vote. In 2018, it was about 15.7 million Texans.

Click Here for information on voter registration

LX Sep 12, 2022

Think the Midterms Aren't Important? 1958 Is Proof They Are.

Responds Oct 7, 2022

How to Spot a Political Scam

Key Midterm Election Dates to Remember

• Oct. 11: Deadline to register
• Oct. 24- Nov. 4: Early voting
• Nov. 8: Election Day

How to Check Voter Registration Status

If you’re unsure of your current voter status, you can check your voter registration status on the Texas Secretary of State’s website on the “Am I Registered?” page. If you have moved to a new address within the same county or have changed your name, you can update your information online as well.

Texas Voting Requirements

• Must be a U.S Citizen.
• Must be at least 18 years old on election day.
• Must be a resident of the county you register.
• Cannot be serving a felony conviction.
• Cannot have been declared mentally incompetent by the final judgment of a court of law.

Texas Requires ID to Vote

Once you’re registered, you’ll still need a valid ID to vote in the state of Texas. The state accepts seven forms of identification:

• A Texas driver’s license
• Texas election ID certificate
• Texas ID card
• Texas handgun license
• U.S. Citizenship certificate with a photo
• U.S. Military ID with a photo
• U.S. Passport.

For voters ages 18-69, photo IDs CAN be expired for up to four years. For those over the age of 70, a photo ID can be expired for any length of time.

If you do not have a photo ID, you may qualify for a Reasonable Impediment Declaration by showing a copy or an original of one of the following:

• Certified domestic birth certificate or court-admissible birth document
• Current utility bill
• Bank statement
• Government check
• Paycheck
• Government document with your name and address including your voter registration certificate.

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

This comes just ahead of midterms when Denton voters will decide on marijuana decriminalization.

Nick Stevens welcomes the news coming out of the White House.

“This is a huge deal specifically because of who it’s coming from,” Stevens said.

The Biden Administration’s move is expected to impact some 6,500 people.

“No one should be in jail just for using or possessing marijuana,” said President Biden.

Denton voters will see the measure on the ballot due primarily to the work of local organization Decriminalize Denton.

“We collected 3,000 signatures from republicans, democrats, and independents, all who agreed that now was the time to put it on the ballot and let the people decide,” said Stevens.

Stevens, a board member for Decriminalize Denton, hand-delivered those signatures months ago in what became a big step in getting the measure on the ballot.

There is concern though. Some in law enforcement believe marijuana is a gateway to other crimes and more drug use.

According to the FBI’s National Incident-Based Reporting System, drug and narcotic offenses show an increase in all categories except marijuana from 2020 to 2021.

“I’d be happy to meet with the Governor, I’d be happy to meet with his opponent Beto O’Rourke and explain to them what we’re doing here in Denton and why it would be beneficial statewide,” said Stevens.

The Department of Justice is working on a process to distribute certificates of pardon, which they can show to potential employers and others as needed.

In Texas, it’s a misdemeanor for small possession of up to 2 ounces. A person could face up to 180 days in jail and a fine of up to $2,000. Possessing more than 4 ounces is a felony.

The pardon does not apply to convictions for possession of other drugs, nor does it apply to non-citizens who were in the U.S. without legal status at the time of an arrest.

The supervisor said everything is on schedule, even though almost half the needed election workers are not yet confirmed for the task.

Scarpello was hired for the Dallas County job in 2020 after big election positions in other states.

In the March 2022 Dallas County primary almost a dozen polling places did not open due to staffing issues. The city of Dallas had complaints about the municipal election run by Scarpello in May 2021.

Scarpello had a presentation for Dallas County Commissioners Tuesday on plans for the upcoming general elections.

“There are some major revisions of the internal management process of how we manage poll workers,” Scarpello said. “We use, this is something fairly new, we use analytics to determine the allocations of personnel and equipment.”

Price said he had already seen the plan. He asked for updated information about staffing since raising concerns over a month ago.

“That’s the reason I’m asking you that. I met with you. I’m telling you it was flawed,” Price said.

Dallas County Democratic and Republican party leaders said issues from the primary election have been addressed.

“The steps we have taken greatly improve where we were in the primary 6 or 7 months ago so I feel comfortable we’re moving in the right direction,” Dallas County Democratic Party Chair Kristy Noble said.

GOP Chair Jennifer Stoddard-Hajdu said better communication is in place about staffing issues.

“We’re all able to work and see where we need to fill in gaps,” she said.

Dallas County’s top elected official, County Judge Clay Jenkins, said he is satisfied with preparations but concerned about the possible impact of the new state law that gives partisan poll watchers more power.

Stoddard Hajdu said the GOP wants citizens to feel their elections are fair and transparent.

“We’ve trained over 450 poll watchers and one of the things we’ve told them is we don’t ever want it to be contentious,” she said.

The election supervisor praised the new warehouse and administration campus that commissioners provided on Round Table Drive near the North Stemmons Freeway.

He said the buildings improve staff training and election operations. The location will also serve as a polling place.

The party leaders said the new location also provides space to thoroughly check election gear in advance.

“They have assured us that every piece of equipment that is going out to a polling location will be tested and verified before it is packed up and sent. That is something new,” Noble said.

Commissioner Elba Garcia thanked Scarpello for the work his department has been doing.

“With all the changes that we’re having with technology, training,  equipment, judges, this will get together,” Garcia said. “At least from my point of view, we are ready to give you all the tools you need to run the best election.”

Scarpello said the new law for poll watchers made people nervous but he believes improved communication with county staff and the party leaders will help avoid problems.

“I was brought in to bring major change, to modernize our office and anytime you have major change there’s always a certain percentage of people uncomfortable with that change and that modernization,” Scarpello said.

Proof of whether his changes work begins with early voting Oct. 24 and the general election day, Tuesday, Nov. 8.

The deadline to register to vote is Oct. 11.

“If that’s Trump calling me again, tell him I’m busy,” Biden said at an event this past week for the Democratic Governors Association, repeating a variation of the quip he also relayed during receptions in Illinois and New York earlier this year. The crowd of a few dozen, as they always do, chuckled as the president continued with the rest of his remarks.

It’s one glimpse of Biden as fundraiser in chief — a man who schmoozes with aplomb while raking in millions at receptions that will be a fixture of his political schedule during the final stretch before Election Day, Nov. 8. At these events, celebrities are spotted and alcohol is consumed, while Biden gets the one-on-one interactions he had missed for much of his campaign and presidency due to COVID-19.

The fundraisers — held in lavish Manhattan apartments, drab conference centers and backyard tents glammed up with chandeliers — have been one of the most visible ways Biden has been deployed this election year at a time when his approval ratings remain underwater and many Democrats aren’t eager to stand by him on the campaign trail.

“Joe Biden is Joe Biden. He’s real, he’s down to earth, if he knows the people in the room … he’s even more relaxed,” said Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., a close ally. “He gets all kinds of questions, he answers them honestly, he probably gives his staff heart attacks.”

So far this year, Biden has headlined 11 receptions to raise cash directly for the Democratic National Committee, and they have brought in more than $19.6 million, according to the committee. The events have ranged from a $300,000 haul at a yacht club in Portland, Oregon, to a cozy, 18-person affair (with four others on video screens) at Hotel Washington near the White House that took in more than $3 million. A pair of fundraisers at mansions in Southern California during the Summit of the Americas in June raked in $5 million in a matter of hours.

Separate from the DNC events, Biden spoke at a fundraiser in September benefiting Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer that brought in more than $450,000 for the state Democratic Party.

The governors association event raised $1 million, and Biden was to have appeared on Tuesday at a fundraiser on behalf of Charlie Crist, the nominee for governor in Florida who has not been shy about wanting the president to campaign with him. That political trip was postponed due to Hurricane Ian.

The DNC also enlists Biden for solicitations sent to its grassroots donor list, with emails signed by the president consistently raising the most money for the committee, party officials say. As of this past week, the DNC has raised more than $107 million, the most at this point in any year and an amount that Democratic officials credited in large part to Biden’s direct involvement.

Biden seems to particularly relish the in-person interactions that a private fundraiser offers.

A famously chummy politician, Biden makes sure at any big-dollar event that his hosts are made to feel special and recognized. For instance, at a late August fundraiser in the Washington suburbs, Biden first spent some time giving a child near the front of the gathering a bit of attention and then the president gave his remarks for several dozen big-dollar DNC supporters.

“Honey, what’s your name?” Biden asked a little girl, sitting through what he joked had to be the most “boring” event. “Well, let me tell you something. Is that your daddy? He owes you big for having to sit here.”

At a June fundraiser in Beverly Hills, California, at the home of billionaire media mogul Haim Saban, the president mused to Saban’s wife, Cheryl, that both men had “married way above our station.” And standing in the 65th-floor apartment of Henry and Marsha Laufer overlooking New York’s Central Park, Biden gushed over the “magnificent” view, noting: “I don’t know if there’s a better view in New York than here.”

Indeed, the residence is a “piece of heaven” for the Laufers, who appeared fastidious about keeping their place spotless. Attendees checked their shoes – expensive Jimmy Choo mules and Saint Laurent pumps among them — at the door and listened to Biden while in socks or slippers provided by the couple. A small group of reporters in attendance were asked to place “booties” over their shoes to protect their hardwood floors and light-colored carpets. (None of the shoe rules applied to Biden, who kept his on and did not wear the disposable coverings.)

At Biden fundraisers, celebrities such as the actor Robert De Niro (in New York) or filmmaker Ken Burns (in Boston) make the occasional cameo, although neither stayed long enough to hear the president speak.

To donors, Biden’s comments, which can run from a few minutes to a half-hour, are a much more casual, off-the-cuff version of the campaign speech that he delivers in front of the cameras. Journalists have access to Biden fundraisers, although just with a notepad and pen, meaning cameras are barred.

Especially as of late, Biden takes care to underline his administration’s accomplishments — a $1.9 trillion pandemic relief package, a bipartisan infrastructure law, a climate and health care bill that came after months of internal Democratic wrangling. He then stresses to donors how the upcoming November midterms are a choice, not just between keeping his achievements and Republicans unraveling them, but on other issues such as abortion and guns.

While aides dispute that his message varies in more private settings, Biden frequently speaks extemporaneously and can be far less guarded than at his formal remarks at a lectern or on a stage.

It’s been at fundraisers where Biden has invoked variations of fascism – be it “semi-fascism” or “tint of fascism” — to refer to Trump-fueled forces within the Republican Party that Biden has said are a threat to the nation’s democratic foundations. While his spokeswoman declined to assess the implications of the recent election in Italy, where a political party with neo-fascist roots won the most votes, Biden at the DGA fundraiser pointed to the results as he warned about the fate of democracy both in the United States and abroad.

At the Laufers’ home, Biden – who tends to avoid talking about his faith when discussing policy — notably referenced the Catholic Church’s position while castigating Republicans who had pushed for broad bans on abortion.

“I happen to be a practicing Roman Catholic. My church doesn’t even make that argument,” he said, referring to abortion bans that leave “no exceptions.”

The quintessential Biden qualities — his candor and his warmth with the crowd — become more pronounced once the press is kicked out and audience members have a chance to ask Biden questions, say people who have attended such gatherings.

The questions Biden gets vary from event to event and they veer from political strategy to the news of the day. During a Manhattan fundraiser at the home of businessman and social justice activist Henry Munoz, Biden was pressed on his plans on immigration and how he would describe his closing message to voters, as well as the impact of the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, according to a person who spoke on condition of anonymity to relay details of a private event.

The bulk of Biden’s fundraising activity has been for the DNC, and Biden earlier this year greenlighted a $15 million transfer from it to the party’s House and Senate campaign committees, a sign of his personal investment in trying to ensure Democrats retain their majorities this fall. A White House official said Biden receives “quite a few” requests from Democratic candidates to appear at fundraisers, and aides work to accommodate as many as possible depending on his schedule and other factors.

Whitmer took priority because she was a co-chair of both Biden’s presidential campaign and his inauguration.

In a victory speech, far-right Italian leader Giorgia Meloni struck a moderate tone after projections based on votes counted from some two-thirds of polling stations showed her Brothers of Italy party ahead of other contenders in Sunday’s balloting.

“If we are called to govern this nation, we will do it for everyone, we will do it for all Italians and we will do it with the aim of uniting the people (of this country),” Meloni said at her party’s Rome headquarters.

“Italy chose us,” she said. “We will not betray (the country) as we never have.”

The formation of a ruling coalition, with the help of Meloni’s right-wing and center-right allies, could take weeks. If Meloni, 45, succeeds, she would be the first woman to hold the country’s premiership.

The mandate to try to form a government is given by Italy’s president after consultations with party leaders.

Meanwhile, former European Central Bank chief Mario Draghi, whose government collapsed two months ago, stays on in a caretaker role.

Differences among Meloni’s potential coalition partners could loom.

She has solidly backed the supplying of Ukraine with arms to defend itself against Russia’s invasion. In contrast, right-wing League leader Matteo Salvini, who before the war was a staunch admirer of Russian President Vladimir Putin, has voiced concern that Western sanctions could end up hurting Italy’s economic interests more that punishing Russia’s.

Former Premier Silvio Berlusconi, another long-time Putin admirer, has said that his inclusion in a center-right bloc’s coalition would guarantee that Italy stays firmly anchored in the European Union and one of its most reliable members.

With Italy’s households and businesses struggling with staggeringly high energy bills as winter approaches, Meloni has demurred from Salvini’s push to swell already-debt-laden Italy by tens of billions of euros for energy relief.

What kind of government the eurozone’s third-largest economy might be getting was being closely watched in Europe, given Meloni’s criticism of “Brussels bureaucrats” and her ties to other right-wing leaders. She recently defended Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban after the European Commission recommended suspending billions of euros in funding to Hungary over concerns about democratic backsliding and the possible mismanagement of EU money.

After opinion polls in the run-up to the vote indicated she would be headed to victory, Meloni started moderating her message of “God, homeland and family” in an apparent attempt to reassure the European Union and other international partners, worried about euro-skepticism.

“This is the time for being responsible,” Meloni said, appearing live on television and describing the situation for Italy and the European Union is “particularly complex.”

She promised more detailed comments later on Monday. In her campaign, she criticized European Union officials as being overly bureaucratic and vowing to protect Italy’s national interests if they clash with EU policies.

Projections based on votes counted from nearly two-thirds of the polling stations in Sunday’s balloting indicated Meloni’s Brothers of Italy party would win some 25.7% of the vote.

That compared to some 19.3% by the closest challenger, the center-left Democratic Party of former Premier Enrico Letta. Salvini’s League was projected to win 8.6% of the ballots, roughly half of what he garnered in the last 2018 election. Berlusconi’s Forza Italia party, appeared headed to win 8%.

Meloni’s meteoric rise in the European Union’s third-largest economy comes at a critical time, as much of the continent reels under soaring energy bills, a repercussion of the war in Ukraine, and the West’s resolve to stand united against Russian aggression is being tested. In the last election, in 2018, Meloni’s party took 4.4%.

Fellow euroskeptic politicians were among the first to celebrate. French politician Marine Le Pen’s party also hailed the result as a “lesson in humility” to the EU.

Santiago Abascal, the leader of Spain’s far-right Vox opposition party, tweeted that “millions of Europeans are placing their hopes in Italy.” Meloni “has shown the way for a proud and free Europe of sovereign nations that can cooperate on behalf of everybody’s security and prosperity.”

Nearly 64% of eligible voters deserted the balloting, according to the Interior Ministry. That is far lower than the previous record for low turnout, 73% in 2018.

Italy has had three coalition governments since the last election — each led by someone who hadn’t run for office, and that appeared to have alienated many voters, pollsters had said.

Meloni’s party was forged from the legacy of a neo-fascist party formed shortly after the war by nostalgists of Fascist dictator Benito Mussolini.

Italy’s complex electoral law rewards campaign alliance. Meloni was buoyed by joining campaign forces with Salvini and Berlusconi.

The Democrats went into the vote at a steep disadvantage since they failed to secure a similarly broad alliance with the left-leaning populists of the 5-Star-Movement, the largest party in the just-ended legislature.

Headed by former Premier Giuseppe Conte, the 5-Stars appeared headed to a third-place finish, with some 16% of the vote. Had they joined forces in a campaign agreement with the Democrats, their coalition would have roughly take the same percentage of Meloni’s alliance

The election Sunday came six months early after Draghi’s pandemic unity government, which enjoyed wide citizen popularity, collapsed in late July after the parties of Salvini, Berlusconi and Conte withheld support in a confidence vote.

Meloni kept her Brothers of Italy party in the opposition, refusing to join Draghi’s unity government or the two previous coalitions led by Conte.

The effort, which breaks the group’s previous $45 million spending record set in 2020, comes about two months after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 case that created a constitutional right to have an abortion. It will be waged by the organization’s political and advocacy arms and will focus on governor’s offices, U.S. Senate seats and legislative races in nine states where abortion rights could be restricted or expanded depending on the outcome at the ballot.

The historic proportions of the midterm campaign, when less money is usually spent, were made possible by a torrent of money raised after the decision by the high court’s new conservative majority, touching off a tectonic shift in the politics of abortion. Now, for the first time, Republicans who have long campaigned against abortion and Roe v. Wade will face voters on an issue that is no longer hypothetical and carries real life consequences.

Planned Parenthood says its spending will help remind voters in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin what’s at stake in a bid to drive turnout by Democratic and independent voters.

“Who wins in these midterm elections will determine whether a state has access to abortion and potentially determine whether we will face a national abortion ban,” said Jenny Lawson, the executive director of Planned Parenthood Votes. “We will be clear about who is on which side.”

A recent poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found a majority of Americans think Congress should pass a law guaranteeing access to legal abortion nationwide. More than half of the respondents said they feel at least somewhat “sad” or “angry” about the Supreme Court’s decision.

Earlier this month in red-state Kansas, voters rejected by nearly 20 percentage points a constitutional amendment that would have allowed the legislature to advance a ban on abortion.

Whether it truly is a galvanizing issue will become clear after Election Day, Nov. 8.

“We say this every cycle: ‘This is the important election,’” said Amy Kennedy, a spokesperson for Planned Parenthood Votes in Georgia. “For us, this really is the most important election cycle of our life.”

Planned Parenthood says it intends to contact 6 million voters through door knocking, phone calls, digital advertising, mailers and radio ads. It has already run some TV ads in Wisconsin, where Republicans control the statehouse and where Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and Republican U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson are up for reelection.

It also is launching a website, takecontrol2022.com.

While the Supreme Court’s ruling in June effectively left setting abortion policy to the states, Planned Parenthood says it is also investing in U.S. Senate races because Republicans have expressed an interest in pursuing a national abortion ban, though such a measure would almost certainly be vetoed by President Joe Biden.

Democrats and their allies have long tried, without much success, to energize supporters by focusing on abortion. But the Supreme Court’s decision clarified the stakes as never before. In roughly a dozen states led by Republicans, abortion has already been banned or heavily restricted. Many more are expected to follow.

“When people go to vote this November, nearly half of the folks voting could be living in a state that either has already banned abortion or is quickly moving to ban abortion. These are entirely new circumstances,” Lawson said. “There are a lot of issues people care about, certainly, but the state of abortion access is absolutely one of the defining issues this November.”

Wednesday, the Dallas City Council signed off on sending the proposal to voters this upcoming November.

It includes a plan to pay the bill for both the expansion of the Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center and upgrades to Fair Park buildings.

Residents would not cover the costs. Instead, it would be paid for by visitors through state hotel taxes and an increase in city hotel taxes.

“This is really a gamechanger for the city, profound investment for the southern sector and we ask for your vote of support today,” said Brain Luallen, executive director of Fair Park First.

NBC DFW has previously reported how the $2 billion plan has received the support of the city council.

The special election is on Nov. 8.

KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON CONVENTION CENTER

Dallas Apr 27, 2022

Hutchison Supports Replacing Namesake Dallas Convention Center

Dallas Feb 9, 2022

Dallas City Council Approves Convention Center Plan

Dallas Feb 8, 2022

Dallas City Council to Vote Today on $2 Billion Plan for New Convention Center

Meanwhile, a Republican congressman who voted to impeach former President Donald Trump after the Jan. 6 insurrection lost to a Trump-backed opponent early Wednesday, while two other impeachment-supporting House Republicans awaited results in their primaries in Washington state.

In Michigan, a political newcomer emerged from the state’s messy Republican gubernatorial primary, setting up a rare woman-vs.-woman general election matchup between conservative commentator Tudor Dixon and incumbent Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

Takeaways from election results Tuesday night:

RED-STATE KANSAS REJECTS ANTI-ABORTION AMENDMENT

Kansas may seem like an unlikely place for abortion rights supporters to notch a major victory.

But on Tuesday, voters in the conservative state resoundingly rejected a constitutional amendment that would have allowed the Legislature to ban abortion. It was the first major test of voter sentiment since the Supreme Court ruling in June to rescind the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide.

The amendment would have allowed the Legislature to overturn a 2019 state Supreme Court decision declaring access to abortion a “fundamental” right under the state constitution.

Its failure at the ballot in a state Donald Trump won by nearly 15 points issues a stark warning to Republicans, who have downplayed the political impact of the high court’s ruling. It also hands a considerable win to Democrats, who are feeling newly energized heading into what was expected to be a tough midterm election season for them.

Kansas currently allows abortion until the 22nd week of pregnancy. After that, abortion is allowed only to save a patient’s life or to prevent “a substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function.”

Gov. Laura Kelly, a Democrat who supports abortion rights, has warned that the Republican-led Legislature’s efforts to ban abortion would hurt the state. On Tuesday it became clear than many voters agree with her.

___

TRUMP’S REVENGE

First-term Michigan Rep. Peter Meijer was one of 10 Republicans who joined Democrats to vote in favor of impeaching Trump after the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack. On Tuesday, he became the latest victim of the former president’s revenge campaign.

Meijer, an heir to a Midwestern grocery store empire and a former Army reserve officer who served in Iraq, lost the GOP contest to former Trump administration official John Gibbs.

“I’m proud to have remained true to my principles, even when doing so came at a significant political cost,” Meijer said in a statement.

In addition to having Trump’s endorsement, Gibbs also shared Trump’s penchant for conspiracy theories: He parroted Trump’s lies about a stolen 2020 election and once spread false claims that Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign chair participated in a satanic ritual that involved bodily fluids.

Meijer is the second of the 10 impeachment-supporting Republicans to lose his primary, joining South Carolina Rep. Tom Rice, who was defeated by a Trump-backed challenger in June. Four others opted to retire rather than face voters’ wrath. And so far, only California Rep. David Valadao has survived — just barely.

Also on the ballot Tuesday were Washington state Reps. Jaime Herrera Beutler and Dan Newhouse, who both faced Trump-backed challengers over their impeachment votes. But those contests were too early to call because Washington state conducts elections by mail, delaying the reporting of results.

Herrera Beutler’s challengers include Joe Kent, a former Green Beret who has cultivated links to right-wing extremist groups and employs a campaign aide who was a member of the Proud Boys. Newhouse’s opponents include Loren Culp, a former GOP gubernatorial nominee who falsely claimed that his 13-point loss to Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee in 2020 was the result of voter fraud.

___

TRUMP’S SLATE

Most of the candidates on Trump’s Arizona slate had a successful primary night.

Senate candidate Blake Masters, whose campaign was bankrolled by tech investor Peter Thiel, won his Republican primary after echoing Trump’s lies of a stolen election and playing up cultural grievances that animate the right, including critical race theory and allegations of big tech censorship.

In the secretary of state race, Mark Finchem, an Arizona state lawmaker who worked to overturn Trump’s 2020 loss in the state, won his primary.

In the state Legislature, Arizona House Speaker Rusty Bowers, who testified at a Jan. 6 hearing about Trump’s pressure to overturn the 2020 election, lost his Republican primary for a state Senate seat to a Trump-backed former lawmaker, David Farnsworth.

Although the race is still too close to call as of early Wednesday morning, Trump-backed Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake has taken a narrow lead over the establishment-backed Karrin Taylor Robson, who was endorsed by Trump’s estranged vice president, Mike Pence.

Arizona has emerged as a key swing state. But it also carries significance to Trump after Joe Biden became the first Democratic presidential candidate in decades to carry what was once a reliably Republican state.

___

GREITENS’ COMEBACK COLLAPSES

Democratic hopes of picking up a U.S. Senate seat in deep-red Missouri faltered Tuesday after Republican voters selected Attorney General Eric Schmitt as their nominee over former Gov. Eric Greitens, who resigned in disgrace in 2018.

Greitens, they predicted, would be toxic in a general election. Democrats landed a strong recruit in beer heir Trudy Busch Valentine, who won her primary Tuesday. And the state’s Republican establishment prepared to put millions of dollars behind an independent candidate in the general election, potentially fracturing the GOP vote.

But Greitens came up short Tuesday, finishing a distant third behind Schmitt and U.S. Rep. Vicky Hartzler. His campaign’s tailspin can likely be traced back to March, when his ex-wife submitted a bombshell legal filing in the former couple’s child custody case.

Sheena Greitens said in a sworn statement that Eric Greitens had abused her and one of their young sons. She also said he displayed such “unstable and coercive behavior” in the lead-up to his 2018 resignation that others took steps to limit his access to firearms.

At the time, Greitens faced potential impeachment after his former hairdresser testified that he blindfolded and restrained her in his basement, assaulted her and appeared to take a compromising photo to pressure her to keep quiet about an affair.

He resigned from office — and avoided testifying under oath about the affair.

He launched his comeback campaign for Senate last year, marketing himself as an unabashedly pro-Trump conservative. And while many in Missouri wrote him off, one important political figure didn’t: Donald Trump, who mused publicly about Greitens’ attributes.

But in the end, Trump stopped short of issuing an endorsement, instead issuing a vague statement this week throwing his support behind “ERIC.”

And on Tuesday, the other “ERIC” in the race — Schmitt — won.

___

MESSY RACE IN MICHIGAN

At its essence, Michigan’s raucous Republican gubernatorial primary was a contest of which candidate’s personal baggage was the least disqualifying. On Tuesday, conservative media personality Tudor Dixon was the victor, setting up a November general election against Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in the battleground state.

Dixon’s past as an actor in a series of vulgar and low-budget horror movies became a campaign issue. But her career moonlighting in titles such as “Buddy BeBop Vs. the Living Dead” and a vampire TV series called “Transitions” paled in comparison to her rivals’ problems.

One rival, Ryan Kelley, faces federal misdemeanor charges after he was recorded on video in Washington during the Jan. 6 insurrection directing a mob of Trump supporters toward a set of stairs leading to the U.S. Capitol. Kelley has pleaded not guilty.

Another, Kevin Rinke, is a former car dealer who settled a series of lawsuits in the 1990s after he was alleged to have made racist and sexist comments, which included calling women “ignorant and stupid” and stating that they “should not be allowed to work in public.”

A third, Garrett Soldano, is a chiropractor and self-help guru who has sold supplements he falsely claimed were a therapeutic treatment for the coronavirus.

Many in the state’s Republican establishment, including billionaire former Trump education secretary Betsy DeVos, view Dixon as their best shot at defeating Whitmer. Trump endorsed Dixon in the race Friday, just a few days before the primary.

But her primary victory is an outcome few would have predicted months ago. In addition to the shortcomings of her rivals, her path was cleared when the two best-known candidates in the race were kicked off the ballot in May for submitting false petition signatures.

But a number of new indicators, related to political frustrations and disengagement from the system suggest many of those young, politically-engaged Americans still may not vote in this year’s midterm elections, which will dictate whether Democrats or Republicans control Washington’s priorities for the next two years – and possibly beyond.

Here are five of those indicators:

1) President Biden’s Meager Approvals Among Young Voters

A New York Times/Siena College poll, conducted July 5-7, found the president’s approval ratings were lowest among registered voters under 30. LX News has tracked the growing frustrations of Gen Z and Millennial voters — and eroding support for President Biden — since the 2020 election. No group of voters has expressed more lost faith in the President than those between 18 and 30 years old. Polls indicate that dissatisfaction is largely connected to expectations for progressive reforms going unfulfilled.

That same New York Times/Siena College poll found that a whopping 94% of Democratic primary voters under the age of 30 want the party to nominate someone other than Biden as the presidential candidate in 2024. While the poll’s sample size for this voting niche was quite small, producing an approximate margin of error of 14 points, the desire among young Democrats for the incumbent to step down after his term is up is overwhelming.  

However, for as much as young voters may want someone else to win the presidency in 2024, when presented with a hypothetical rematch of the 2020 election, 38% of registered voters under 30 still said they’d vote for Biden again, with only 30% saying they’d vote for former president Trump. 

2) Young Voters Threaten to Sit Out 2024, or Cast Protest Votes

While the Times/Siena poll found many older voters also want to see fresh blood in the 2024 race, few voters over the age of 30 indicated they would sit out the presidential election if faced with a Biden/Trump rematch.

However, a whopping 22% of voters under 30 responded to the survey that they would sit out the election if their top choices were Biden and Trump. Another 7% responded that they’d vote for a third-party candidate. 

While that 22% mark comes with an 8% margin of error and 2024 is still a long way away, these results may trigger 2016 flashbacks for Hillary Clinton supporters, who saw third-party protest votes — especially among young voters — as one key reason the Democrat lost the election to Donald Trump.

The presidency was ultimately decided by less than 80,000 votes in three key swing states (Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania) – states that Green Party candidate Jill Stein and Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson combined to pull in more than 550,000 votes between them. However, in 2020, concerns about protest votes never materialized, as third-party candidates pulled in just a fraction of their 2016 voting share. 

3) A “Roe Wave” Among Young Voters?

When LX News compared voter enthusiasm from April, before news leaked out of the Supreme Court’s abortion decision, to enthusiasm after the court released its final opinion, it found a large spike in midterm enthusiasm among progressive and young voters.

A poll from late June, by The Economist and YouGov, shows more support for abortion rights among young voters than any other generation. The Times/Siena poll also found abortion was tied with the economy as America’s top problem in the minds of voters under 30.

According to the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning & Engagement (CIRCLE) at Tufts University, issues can drive young voters to the polls. In 2018, CIRCLE found young voters — largely motivated by the mass shooting in Parkland, Fla. — mobilized and turned out in record numbers. The 28% turnout for voters under the age of 30 in 2018 was double the young adult turnout in the 2014 midterms, according to CIRCLE research.

4) Abortion News may Also Drive Young People to not Vote

More than any other generation, 41% of adults under 30 indicated the Supreme Court’s abortion decision would make them more likely to vote in this fall’s midterms, according to a recent CBS/YouGov poll.

However, 21% of that demographic also said the decision would make them less likely to vote, far more than any other generation. 

LX News has tracked young adults’ growing disillusionment with the political system, and how many are disengaging from the major political parties. More now believe their vote doesn’t make a difference (42%) than ever before, according to research from the Harvard Youth Poll. And 36% of adults under 30 now believe “political involvement rarely has tangible results.”

5) Decreases in Youth Voter Registration

A lot fewer teenagers are registering to vote in 2022, compared to 2018’s Parkland-inspired wave, according to CIRCLE.  That means a large portion of the more than 8 million 18-to-19-year-olds who are eligible to vote in America for the first time may miss out on participating in this year’s election.

When looking at voter registration for adults 18-24, some states — in particular key swing states and some that have introduced automatic voting registration — are seeing higher rates of registration.  That includes states like California, where youth turnout was particularly bad in 2021.

But according to CIRCLE, the slow pace in dozens of states is “a call to action for campaigns and organizers” who want to engage young people in the democratic process.

While Texans gave $14.5 million to the Democrat’s campaign, nearly half of O’Rourke’s record-breaking $27.6 million fundraising haul came from out-of-state donors.

The details come from an O’Rourke campaign finance report so huge it took several days to upload to the Texas Ethics Commission website.

Click here to read more about the donations made to both gubernatorial candidates from our partners at the Dallas Morning News.

In Illinois, Democrats helped boost a Republican gubernatorial candidate loyal to former President Donald Trump in the hopes that he would be the easier candidate to beat in November. And in at least two states, election deniers were defeated, even as pro-Trump lightning rods elsewhere won.

Takeaways from the latest round of primary elections:

COLORADO REPUBLICANS CHOOSE ABORTION RIGHTS CANDIDATE

The abortion debate consumed the nation this week, but there was no race where it mattered more than Colorado’s Republican primary for the U.S. Senate, where businessman Joe O’Dea became one of the only abortion-rights-supporting Republicans in the nation to win a statewide primary this year.

O’Dea beat back a stiff challenge from state Rep. Ron Hanks, a Trump loyalist who opposed abortion with no exceptions for rape, incest or the life of the mother.

O’Dea will face Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet in November, and if he wins, he would become just the third Senate Republican — and the only male — to support abortion rights.

He said he backs a ban on late-term abortions and government funding of abortions but that the decision to terminate a pregnancy in the initial months is “between a person and their God.”

Democrats had spent at least $2.5 million on ads designed to boost O’Dea’s opponent by promoting, among other things, that he was “too conservative” for backing a complete abortion ban.

Democrats hoped that the Roe decision would give them an advantage in several swing states, including Colorado. But, at least for now, O’Dea’s victory would seem to complicate the Democrats’ plans.

A WIN FOR TRUMP OR THE DEMOCRATS?

In the final weeks of a campaign, Trump once again attached himself to a Republican who was leading the race. This time, it was farmer Darren Bailey in Illinois, who easily cruised to the GOP nomination in the governor’s race.

But while Trump can add Bailey to his endorsement record, Democrats are betting that his victory may be short-lived.

Bailey now goes on to face Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker in the November general election, which is just what Pritzker and his allies wanted. Pritzker, the billionaire heir to the Hyatt hotel fortune, and the Democratic Governors Association spent heavily on advertising to help Bailey win the GOP nomination. Among other things, the ads reminded the state’s Democratic-leaning electorate that he is “100% pro-life.”

It’s a risky gamble. While Bailey may look like an easier opponent in the general election, it’s feasible that he could ride a red wave — if it materializes — to the Illinois governor’s mansion. Pritzker’s predecessor in office was a Republican.

Bailey showed off political acumen by besting the early Republican front-runner Richard Irvin, the mayor of Illinois’ second-largest city, Aurora. Irvin lost despite being the beneficiary of a staggering $50 million investment from billionaire Ken Griffin. Irvin, who is Black, refused to say whether he voted for Trump and largely avoided talking about abortion, delivering the kind of moderate message that could have cut across ideological lines in a general election.

Instead, Republicans nominated Bailey, a Trump loyalist who reads from Bible verses in campaign videos and proudly touts his anti-abortion policies in a state Trump lost by 17 percentage points in 2020.

HOCHUL’S OPPORTUNITY

The scandals of the men around her did not derail New York Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul, who overcame primary challengers on the right and left to win her first election test as the state’s chief executive.

Now, Hochul, New York’s first female governor, is positioned to emerge as a leading voice in the Democratic Party as it navigates the post-Roe landscape.

The low-profile Hochul stepped into one of the nation’s most prominent governorships last fall after Andrew Cuomo resigned in the midst of a sexual harassment scandal. She had promised to restore New Yorkers’ faith in their government, only for her handpicked lieutenant governor to be arrested this spring in a federal corruption probe.

Hochul was either “consistently shamefully out of the loop, or shamefully enabling through her inaction,” charged one of her primary challengers, New York City’s elected public advocate, Jumaane Williams.

The attack ultimately didn’t land in the primary. But don’t expect such criticism to disappear as the race for New York governor enters its next phase.

Rep. Lee Zeldin emerged from a crowded Republican field to earn the GOP nomination for governor. He defeated Andrew Giuliani, the son of New York City’s former mayor Rudy Giuliani, among others.

And while Hochul has a serious reelection test ahead, look for her to step into the national spotlight as the abortion debate rages.

The Democratic governor said in recent days that New York would be a “safe harbor” for those seeking abortions.

ELECTION DENIERS GO DOWN

They celebrated their allegiance to Trump’s baseless conspiracy theories on the campaign trail. But on Tuesday night, a handful of these so-called election deniers had nothing to cheer about.

In Colorado, Republican voters did not reward secretary of state candidate Tina Peters for championing Trump’s lies about election fraud. She was bested by Pam Anderson, a former county clerk who previously led the state clerks’ association and defends the state’s mail-in elections system.

Some officials in both parties worried that Peters would win the primary. That’s even after Peters, the Mesa County clerk, was indicted for a security breach spurred by conspiracy theories related to the 2020 presidential election. The state GOP had called on her to suspend her campaign.

Now, Anderson, not Peters, will take on incumbent Democratic Secretary of State Jena Griswold, who’s led the national fight against 2020 election deniers.

Elsewhere in Colorado, Senate candidate Hanks had also promoted lies about the last presidential election. In addition to being an outspoken opponent of abortion rights, he had attended the “Stop the Steal” rally that preceded the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

And in Mississippi, Trump loyalist Michael Cassidy lost a runoff election to incumbent Rep. Michael Guest, who had voted to create an independent commission to investigate the Jan. 6 attack. Cassidy said in campaign speeches that Guest had done nothing to stop “the persecution of Jan. 6 political prisoners.”

LIGHTNING RODS WIN

Two Republicans familiar with controversy tested for the first time whether Republican voters deemed them too extreme to go back to Congress. They both prevailed.

First-term Rep. Mary Miller, who campaigned alongside Trump over the weekend, defeated five-term Rep. Rodney Davis, who was considered more moderate. The primary victory all but ensures Miller will return to Congress for another term given the heavy Republican advantage in her 15th Congressional District, which is the most Republican district in the state.

Miller won just days after describing the Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade as “a victory for white life.” A spokesperson later said she had intended to say the decision was a victory for a “right to life.”

Miller is no stranger to provocative statements. Soon after joining the House, Miller quoted Adolf Hitler, saying he was right to say that “whoever has the youth has the future.”

And in Colorado, Trump loyalist Lauren Boebert defeated a moderate state representative who had run a primary campaign focused on Boebert’s extremism. It didn’t work.

Boebert’s controversial moves are many. She vowed to carry a handgun on the House floor. She faced calls for her censure last year after being caught on video making Islamophobic comments about Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar. And she heckled President Joe Biden in his first State of the Union address.

But after winning her primary, she is almost certain to return to Congress for another two years. Her GOP-leaning 3rd Congressional District in western Colorado became even more Republican after redistricting.

Elections Jun 28, 2022

GOP Reps. Boebert, Miller Win Primary Battles Against More Centrist Candidates

Jan. 6 Hearing Jun 28, 2022

Trump Lunged at Security Chief, Tried to Force Driver to Go to the Capitol, White House Aide Says

A ROE SHIFT IN NEBRASKA?

Nebraska’s low-profile special election to fill the remainder of former Rep. Jeff Fortenberry’s term was not supposed to be close. Republicans have held the district for nearly 60 years.

Yet Republican Mike Flood defeated Democrat Patty Pansing Brooks by only 4 percentage points on Tuesday.

The specific cause of the margin wasn’t immediately unclear, although there was evidence of higher turnout in one Democratic-leaning county that could be related to the Roe decision.

Heading into election day, Flood appeared to have a strong edge in the district, which includes Lincoln, parts of suburban Omaha and dozens of smaller, more conservative towns. The district has nearly 68,000 more Republicans than Democrats and hasn’t elected a Democrat to the House since 1964.

What happened? Lancaster County, home to the state capital and the University of Nebraska, offers some clues.

In 2020, Fortenberry won the district by nearly 22 percentage points, but he lost Lancaster County by less than 1 percentage point. In Tuesday’s special election, the Republican Flood lost Lancaster County by more than 13 percentage points.

In the end, the swing wasn’t enough to move a heavily-Republican district, but Democrats could look to the results for hope that the Roe decision will be a significant motivator for the Democratic base.

Incidentally, Fortenberry was sentenced to two years of probation on Tuesday for lying to the FBI. Flood and Pansing Brooks are expected to face off again in the November general election.

Illinois Republican Rep. Mary Miller called the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the Roe v. Wade decision that had legalized abortion nationwide a “historic victory for white life” during a weekend rally with former President Donald Trump. Her spokesperson said she misspoke. She defeated fellow GOP incumbent Rodney Davis.

Another Trump ally, Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert, one of Congress’ most polarizing members, easily beat back a challenge from a more mainstream Republican.

Mississippi Republican Rep. Steven Palazzo, a six-term incumbent, lost in a rare runoff to Sheriff Mike Ezell. But his Republican House colleague, Michael Guest, won a runoff race in the state, despite defying Trump and voting to create an independent commission to investigate last year’s insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

In Illinois, Democratic Rep. Sean Casten beat progressive Rep. Marie Newman for a seat in suburban Chicago after a declining population cost the state a House seat.

Six states are holding congressional primary elections, primary runoffs or special elections. In addition to testing Trump’s national influence, they are providing hints of how voters are reacting to the high court’s decision on abortion.

Some of the top elections:

BOEBERT’S STAYING POWER

Boebert, a first-term firebrand, saw her GOP-leaning 3rd Congressional District in western Colorado become even more Republican after redistricting. She had little trouble with moderate state Rep. Don Coram, a rancher and hemp farmer, who slams what he calls Boebert’s extremism.

Boebert has railed against the “Biden regime” and “socialist” Democrats. She trumpeted her gun-toting Second Amendment credentials and opposition to COVID-19 restrictions that briefly shuttered her “Shooters” restaurant.

Her opponent had been betting voters alienated by Boebert’s provocations would choose someone more in the tradition of centrists that have played well in the area, including five-term Republican Rep. Scott Tipton, who lost to Boebert in an upset last cycle. That didn’t happen.

In Colorado’s deeply conservative El Paso County, meanwhile, eight-term Republican Rep. Doug Lamborn staved off a challenge from the right from state Rep. Dave Williams for his 5th Congressional District seat. Williams failed to get the phrase “Let’s Go Brandon,” code for an obscenity against Biden, added to his name on the ballot.

Lamborn faces an ongoing House ethics investigation over whether he misused official resources for personal purposes, has survived primary challenges in the past as an ardent opponent of abortion and backer of the significant U.S. military presence in Colorado Springs. Earlier this year, Williams led a 24-hour filibuster in the statehouse over a bill allowing unrestricted access to abortion. The bill eventually became law.

MILLER TOPS FELLOW INCUMBENT

Miller bested Davis for the GOP nomination in a sprawling, heavily red district in central Illinois that was redrawn after the state’s shrinking population cost it a congressional seat.

Miller, first elected in 2020, is no stranger to controversy. She quoted Adolf Hitler shortly after winning her seat, saying during a rally that “Hitler was right on one thing. He said, ‘Whoever has the youth has the future.’” She later apologized after Democrats in Illinois called for her resignation. She also voted against certifying Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 presidential election and is a member of the far-right House Freedom Caucus.

On Saturday night, she made the “white life” comment as Trump stood behind her at a rally in Mendon, drawing cheers from the crowd. Miller has since said she’s not racist, and her spokesperson said she had intended to say the ruling was a victory for the “right to life.”

Davis was a co-chair of Trump’s 2020 Illinois campaign but voted to certify the 2020 presidential election results. He had the backing of almost all of the district’s 35 county party chairs and vowed to “reimplement” Trump policies, including walling off the U.S.-Mexico border.

In the state’s 6th Congressional District, Casten defeated his fellow Democratic colleague Newman, who was first elected to the House in 2020. She faces an ongoing House Ethics Committee investigation over whether she promised federal employment to a political opponent.

Casten is a two-term congressman who flipped a suburban seat in 2018 that Republicans had held for decades.

FLOOD OF CANDIDATES FOR OPEN ILLINOIS SEATS

Jonathan Jackson, the son of civil rights leader the Rev. Jesse Jackson, emerged from a crowded field vying to replace 15-term Democratic Rep. Bobby Rush, the only lawmaker who has ever beaten Barack Obama in a race. Obama challenged Rush in a 2000 U.S. House primary and lost.

The heavily Democratic 1st Congressional District that Jackson will now run in November to represent was redrawn after the 2020 census and now stretches from Chicago’s South Side to Kankakee.

In Illinois’ open 17th Congressional District, Esther Joy King won the GOP nomination, while Eric Sorensen, a former meteorologist, won the Democratic nomination. They are vying to replace five-term Democratic Rep. Cheri Bustos, who decided against seeking reelection in the largely rural swath of northwestern Illinois.

In Illinois’ heavily Democratic 7th District, longtime Democratic Rep. Danny Davis of Chicago beat progressive and gun violence prevention activist Kina Collins on Tuesday — though the margin was far narrower than his commanding primary win over her in 2020.

MISSISSIPPI RUNOFFS: ONE INCUMBENT WINS, ONE LOSSES

One of two Mississippi congressmen facing a rare primary runoff election lost his seat.

Palazzo blamed the coronavirus pandemic and the Biden administration for his defeat to Ezell, the sheriff of a coastal county. But the congressman had also been accused in a 2021 congressional ethics report of abusing his office by misspending campaign funds.

He said that Mississippi voters “hired me to fight the woke, liberal agenda and to push back against government overreach, and I’ve done that for 12 years.”

But Palazzo also added: “With COVID and because of what the Biden administration is doing to this country, they took their anger out on me.”

Ezell said he won because of connections he forged during more than 40 years in law enforcement. “When people call and need something, I’ve been accessible to them.”

Meanwhile, Guest won a third term after being forced into a runoff against former Navy fighter pilot Michael Cassidy.

NEBRASKA SPECIAL ELECTION OVERLAPS WITH SENTENCING

Former Republican Rep. Jeff Fortenberry of Nebraska was sentenced to probation on Tuesday for lying to federal agents just as voters were picking a replacement for the rest of his term.

Fortenberry resigned in March after being convicted of intentionally misleading FBI agents about his knowledge of an illegal, $30,000 campaign contribution from a Nigerian billionaire at a 2016 fundraiser in Los Angeles.

A judge sentenced him to two years of probation, a $25,000 fine and community service.

Two state lawmakers, Republican Mike Flood and Democrat Patty Pansing Brooks, are running in a special election to succeed Fortenberry, who served nine terms in the Republican-heavy district that includes Lincoln and dozens of smaller, rural communities. They’ll compete again in November to determine who serves a new term, beginning in January.

___