Legislatures and Parliaments

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Nicola Sturgeon Resigns as Scotland’s First Minister, Citing Toll of the Job

      by

      Nicola Sturgeon’s resignation removes one of the most formidable figures from British politics, one who has dedicated her life to the cause of Scottish independence.LONDON — Nicola Sturgeon, a fiery campaigner for Scotland’s independence who led its government for more than eight years, resigned on Wednesday, declaring that she was exhausted and had become too polarizing a figure to lead the country’s hurly-burly politics as it weighs another bid to break from Britain.Her resignation removes one of the most formidable figures from British politics. A skilled veteran of the United Kingdom’s system of power sharing and a sure-handed leader during the coronavirus pandemic, she outlasted four British prime ministers, while bedeviling each of them with her unyielding push for Scottish independence.But that goal has remained elusive and appears no closer than it was nearly a decade ago, when voters rejected a proposal for independence. Support for leaving the union has ebbed and flowed over the years, but the British government remains implacably opposed to another referendum. And Ms. Sturgeon said she was no longer the leader to see the battle through.“Is carrying on right for me?” Ms. Sturgeon, 52, said at a news conference in Edinburgh. “And, more important, is me carrying on right for my country, my party, and for the independence cause I have devoted my life to?”“I’ve reached the difficult conclusion that it’s not,” she said.In recent weeks, Ms. Sturgeon had also become embroiled in a dispute over the Scottish government’s transgender policy. Britain’s Parliament rejected legislation from Scotland’s Parliament making it easier for people to legally change their gender. Ms. Sturgeon said she would remain as first minister until the Scottish National Party, which controls Parliament, chooses a successor, most likely at a party conference next month. So dominant is her position that political analysts said there was no obvious successor — an acute problem for a party that faces a crossroads on independence, but a weakness that she said was another reason for her to relinquish the stage now.There was a distinct echo in Ms. Sturgeon’s resignation of the similar decision by Jacinda Ardern, the prime minister of New Zealand, who announced her resignation last month by saying she “no longer had enough in the tank.” Both women emphasized the relentless toll of their jobs and their yearning to focus on other parts of their lives.Journalists and members of the public gathered outside Bute House, the official residence of the first minister, where Ms. Sturgeon held a news conference.Pool photo by Jane BarlowLike Ms. Ardern, Ms. Sturgeon drew widespread attention for adopting policies on Covid that diverged from those of other countries — in her case, keeping lockdowns in place longer than in neighboring England. As with Ms. Ardern, Ms. Sturgeon’s Covid policies brought mixed results and her popularity, while still decent, dimmed as the urgency of the pandemic gave way to concerns about the economy.“While Sturgeon is effectively the equivalent of a state governor, she has an extraordinary international profile,” said Nicola McEwen, professor of territorial politics at the University of Edinburgh. “But she has become a figure who divides; there is a recognition that she may not be the person to get them to the next level.”Still, her announcement left Scotland’s political establishment slack jawed. Only last month, she told the BBC that she had “plenty in the tank” to continue leading Scotland and was “nowhere near ready” to step down.On Wednesday, however, Ms. Sturgeon said she had been wrestling for weeks over whether to resign. She spoke about only realizing now how exhausting the pandemic was for her, and said she had come to a final decision on Tuesday while attending the funeral of Allan Angus, a friend and leading figure in the Scottish National Party.Ms. Sturgeon has been married to Peter Murrell, the chief executive of the S.N.P., since 2010. She does not have children, but spoke about her twin niece and nephew during her resignation speech, noting that when she had entered government in 2007, both were very young and now they were celebrating their 17th birthday.Commuters heading home during rush hour in Edinburgh on Wednesday evening spoke of their surprise at Ms. Sturgeon’s choice. Regardless of their opinions on her politics, many said that it was an important moment for the nation.Sean MacMillan, 29, said he expected her decision to step down could have an impact on the push for a second independence referendum as she did not have a clear strong successor. “It is really unclear who is coming next, and I am sure it will change with that,” he said.Prime Minister Rishi Sunak offered restrained praise, thanking Ms. Sturgeon on Twitter “for her long-standing service. I wish her all the best for her next steps.” Mr. Sunak and Ms. Sturgeon have a cordial relationship, an improvement over the scarcely concealed hostility between her and one of Mr. Sunak’s predecessors, Boris Johnson.A photograph released by 10 Downing Street showing Prime Minister Rishi Sunak of Britain and First Minister Nicola Sturgeon of Scotland during a meeting in Inverness, Scotland, last month.Simon Walker/No 10 Downing Street, via ReutersMs. Sturgeon denied she had resigned over the transgender legislation or any other short-term political setbacks. But she said that in the current hothouse political environment, “issues that are controversial end up almost irrationally so.”Scotland’s law would allow transgender people to have the gender with which they identify legally recognized, and to get a new birth certificate without a medical diagnosis. But the British government swiftly overruled the Scottish Parliament, saying the law conflicted with equality laws that apply across Britain.For Ms. Sturgeon, passing the legislation was part of what she said was a deeply felt commitment to protect minority rights, and she denounced the British government’s decision to block it. But the law was less popular with the Scottish public than it was in Parliament. And it quickly became a cudgel in the heated cultural clash over transgender rights, with both sides seizing on it to attack the other.The debate was inflamed by the case of Isla Bryson, who was convicted of raping two women before her gender transition. She was initially placed in a women’s prison, prompting an outcry over the safety of other female inmates. Ms. Sturgeon later announced that Ms. Bryson had been moved to a men’s prison.The handling of the case exposed Ms. Sturgeon to sharp criticism and put her in an awkward position when she was quizzed repeatedly at a news conference about whether she regarded Ms. Bryson as a woman.“She regards herself as a woman,” a visibly frustrated Ms. Sturgeon replied. “I regard the individual as a rapist.”A rally against a controversial transgender legislation in Glasgow earlier this month.Andy Buchanan/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesWhen it came to independence, Ms. Sturgeon was rarely at a loss for words. Having joined the Scottish National Party when she was 16, she spent much of her time trying to secure for Scotland as much power over its own affairs as possible. Allies described her as one of the most important leaders of the era of devolution, when London delegated more power to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.Ms. Sturgeon’s departure is unlikely to weaken Scotland’s independence drive. It is, after all, the Scottish National Party’s founding goal. But as the party gathers at next month’s conference to plot the next phase of the campaign, her absence could greatly affect their tactics and strategy.The Scottish government had at one point planned to schedule a second referendum next October, following the unsuccessful vote in 2014. But those hopes were dashed last November when Britain’s Supreme Court ruled that Scotland’s Parliament did not have the right to act unilaterally. The court upheld the authority of the British Parliament to consent to a referendum, which it has steadfastly refused to do.That has left the Scottish nationalists with a dilemma. Ms. Sturgeon has proposed that the Scots treat the next British general election, which must be held by January 2025, as a de facto referendum on independence. A clear majority for the Scottish National Party, she said, would effectively be a vote for independence.The problem with this approach, analysts said, is that it would lack legal or constitutional legitimacy. That could hurt Scotland’s quest to join the European Union, which it has said it wants to do after separating from Britain. There are practical questions about how Scotland would break away if Britain did not recognize the move.Other people in the party would prefer to continue to build support for independence in the hopes that the pro-independence majority would become so emphatic that the Parliament in London would have no choice but to go along.Ms. Sturgeon leaving the news conference on Wednesday where she announced she would step down.Pool photo by Jane BarlowSupport for independence has waxed and waned since 2014, when Scots voted against leaving by 55 percent to 45 percent. But the Brexit vote in 2016, which was deeply unpopular in Scotland, has built a durable, if small, majority in favor of independence. Scotland’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, which many viewed as more sure-footed than England’s, also fired up separatist sentiment.The prospects for independence, analysts said, will depend in part on how the Scottish National Party handles life after Ms. Sturgeon.“The downside risks are obvious,” said John Curtice, a professor of politics at the University of Strathclyde and one of Britain’s leading experts on polling. “That the party will not be able to find someone with the communications skills of Sturgeon,” leaving the nationalists divided and without a plan.Ms. Sturgeon herself emphasized the necessity of having someone fully dedicated to her party’s causes. “Giving absolutely everything of yourself to this job is the only way to do it,” she said, before acknowledging that she was no longer able to do that. “The country deserves nothing less.”Megan Specia More

    • 100 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      How Does Scotland Fit Into the UK Government?

      by

      The news that Nicola Sturgeon, the first minister of Scotland, will step down raises a variety of questions about how the United Kingdom — England, Scotland and Wales, along with Northern Ireland — is governed. Here is a quick guide.What role does the king play?The United Kingdom operates under a constitutional monarchy. While there is no single written constitutional document, laws and carefully documented traditions together form a Constitution that binds the monarch, currently King Charles III.These rules have accumulated in centuries of legislation. Together, they make the king a constitutional monarch: an embodiment of power and statehood with no personal public role in politics, and tight constraints even on private influence.Who runs the U.K. government?Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is the current leader of the government of the United Kingdom. He took over as the country’s 57th prime minister in October, after his predecessor, Liz Truss, lasted just six weeks in the post.The role of the prime minister, according to the U.K. government’s official website, is to oversee the operation of the civil service and government agencies. The leader also appoints members of the government and is the principal government figure in the House of Commons.Where does Scotland fit in?Here’s where it gets interesting. Mr. Sunak is responsible for some, but not all, of what happens across the United Kingdom. His government makes decisions for England, but some powers and responsibilities are left to elected officials in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland — a result of what is known as devolution.(Northern Ireland is having its own leadership issues at the moment, after the first minister resigned last year and the government remains in limbo.)In Scotland, the government makes decisions relating to the economy, education, health, justice and other areas. The government enforced its own Covid policies during the pandemic, and it has the power to set its own income-tax rates. Decisions regarding immigration, foreign policy and defense are left to the U.K. government.How are first ministers appointed?Following a Scottish parliamentary election, a first minister is nominated by the Parliament in Edinburgh and is appointed by the monarch.The first minister is responsible for appointing Scottish ministers to create a cabinet and is responsible for setting and carrying out government policy. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Greece Moves to Block Extreme-Right Party as Election Nears

      by

      A new law targets a party founded by an imprisoned former official of the neo-Nazi group Golden Dawn. But critics say its reach could be wider.Greece’s government has moved to block from Parliament an extreme-right party seen as a successor to the neo-Nazi group Golden Dawn, which shot to prominence a decade ago but was effectively banned after being declared a criminal organization.On Wednesday, a government-sponsored bill in Parliament that bars from the legislature parties whose leaders have been convicted of serious crimes and are deemed a potential threat to democracy passed with the votes of the ruling conservatives and the opposition Socialist party, who control a total of 178 seats out of the 300 in the house. The main leftist Syriza party abstained, and smaller opposition parties voted against it.While it was not explicitly mentioned in the bill, the new legislation would effectively disqualify National Party — Greeks, a party founded by a former top official of Golden Dawn, Ilias Kasidiaris, on the grounds that he is a convicted criminal.Government officials have named Mr. Kasidiaris as the target of the bill and on Tuesday he sent an injunction to the speaker of Parliament demanding that it be revoked.Mr. Kasidiaris, who has a tattoo of a swastika that he describes as an ancient Greek symbol and has long expressed support for President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, is serving a 13-year jail sentence, but he has campaigned for his new party from his cell.The government’s move came after opinion polls showed that National Party — Greeks would exceed the 3 percent threshold for entering Parliament in elections that are expected in April.Mr. Kasidiaris and other leaders of Golden Dawn were found guilty in October 2020 of running a criminal organization that attacked leftist critics and migrants, and the party, which shot to prominence in 2012 during an economic crisis, was disbanded.The party remained popular even after the arrest of its leadership in 2013, when the murder of a leftist rapper, Pavlos Fyssas, was linked to a member of Golden Dawn. Its lawmakers secured re-election in 2015, while facing criminal charges, and remained in Parliament until 2019, when they failed to win re-election.While the dire conditions that allowed Golden Dawn to thrive are gone — Greece’s economy has been growing since it emerged from its last bailout in 2018 — the new party, which Mr. Kasidiaris founded in 2020, has been gaining popularity amid a broader rise of nationalism in parts of Europe. It campaigns on issues like the deportation of undocumented immigrants and “zero tolerance” for crime.A recent opinion poll put support for Mr. Kasidiaris’s party ahead of the general elections expected in April at around 3.4 percent.But about 70 percent of respondents in the same poll also said the party should be stopped from running in elections, which may have emboldened the government.The bill passed on Wednesday built on a 2021 law that prevented convicted criminals from running as party leaders in elections. The new law extends that ban to a party’s nominal head as well as its “true leadership,” reflecting fears that Mr. Kasidiaris might control legislators from behind the scenes.The bill also stipulates that parties should serve “the free functioning of the democratic Constitution,” a change that some critics said could leave the door open for abuse.Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis said the measure’s aim was “not to ban ideas but to safeguard the democratic constitutional order,” noting that similar provisions existed in other European countries. “We have a duty to protect democracy from its enemies,” he told Parliament on Tuesday.While supporting the fundamental aim of the ban, some Greek opposition parties argued that it was too broad.The leftist Syriza party said the legislation could be subject to “misinterpretations” and proposed restricting the ban to parties with Nazi or racist ideologies. Greece’s Communist Party said it included “dangerous generalizations and preconditions for the participation of parties in elections.”Nikos Alivizatos, an expert in constitutional law who was attacked by Golden Dawn members and supporters in 2010, said the provision could lead to “innocent” parties being blocked, and that it would have been better to target violent groups and to simply ban convicted criminals from running as legislators, not just as party leaders.“It’s dangerous to move beyond the criterion of the direct use of violence, because then it becomes an almost philosophical issue, and there is room for varying interpretations,” Mr. Alivizatos said. “The price of every democracy is to tolerate someone who might be a fascist.”In a speech in Parliament before the vote on Wednesday, the leader of Syriza, Alexis Tsipras, argued that Mr. Mitsotakis’s primary aim was to eliminate an electoral rival to his right. “He’s not concerned about blocking Nazis, fascist groups or about cracking down on far-right and nationalist populism,” Mr. Tsipras said. “He’s concerned about getting the votes of the far right and nationalists.”Since Golden Dawn’s demise, other, less extreme parties have emerged on the Greek far right including the nationalist Greek Solution, which has 10 seats in Greece’s 300-member Parliament. But none has espoused a neo-Nazi ideology like Golden Dawn.In promoting his party, Mr. Kasidiaris has sought to cast it as patriotic and anti-establishment and has recorded phone messages for his YouTube channel on topics ranging from Russia’s war in Ukraine (he opposed Greek support for Ukraine’s war effort) to migration (he called for all undocumented migrants to be deported). He has managed to do this despite a ban on cellphones in Greek prisons.In a post on Twitter on Tuesday, Mr. Kasidiaris said the legislation passed on Wednesday, which he said was targeting him, was unconstitutional and violated the European Convention of Human Rights and the principle of free elections.The prime minister insisted that it was not Mr. Kasidiaris’s beliefs that had prompted the intervention, but the crimes for which he, along with other Golden Dawn leaders, was convicted.“No one wants to see parliamentary representation again become a vehicle for violence against citizens, leading to brutal murders, injuries and abhorrent pogroms,” Mr. Mitsotakis said on Tuesday. “No one wants to relive the thuggery οf the past.” More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Support for Tunisian President Slipping After Parliament Vote

      by

      Turnout was meager in two rounds of voting for a Parliament stripped of much of its power, with most political parties barred from the elections.Tunisia, the only Arab country to emerge from the Arab Spring protests of more than a decade ago with a democracy, has not had a Parliament since its president suspended the assembly and established one-man rule in July 2021.But when the names of the North African country’s newly elected members of Parliament were finally announced on Tuesday, after two rounds of voting, it did not seem like a comeback for democracy. In the end, perhaps what the election results signaled most strongly was fast-fading support for President Kais Saied.Only 11.4 percent of eligible voters cast ballots in the runoff on Sunday, only slightly more than the 11.2 percent in the first round — the lowest turnout in any global election in decades, according to Max Gallien, a political scientist at Britain’s Institute of Development Studies. At least two of the president’s loudest supporters lost their bids, though several others won.“The loss of people who claim to be close to Saied is another indicator of the shallowness of the political project he is advancing: no vision, no strategy, no team,” said Youssef Cherif, a political analyst who directs the Columbia Global Centers in Tunis.Banking on his initial widespread popularity, Mr. Saied rewrote Tunisia’s post-Arab Spring Constitution last year, giving himself sweeping authority and demoting Parliament to an advisory body, stripping much of its power. He also issued a new electoral law banning political parties from involvement in the election, so that voters chose individual candidates rather than voting for party lists as they had done in previous elections.As a result, Parliament was set to be a patchwork of individuals without party affiliations, platforms or agendas to hold them together. The very fact that the winners participated, however, signaled a degree of support for the president: It meant they were willing to at least lend some legitimacy to his new program. Opposition groups boycotted the election.The parliamentary elections were widely seen as a gauge of what Tunisians thought of his plans, and of whether Mr. Saied was sincere about preserving Tunisian democracy, as he had pledged to do. On both, critics and analysts charged, Mr. Saied fell flat.In some districts, only one candidate ran, negating the need for any runoff at all. Women won just 25 of the assembly’s 161 seats, according to Tunisia’s electoral authority, compared with 68 who held seats in 2014. Mr. Saied now controls the elections authority after replacing its formerly independent board.The election of a new Parliament was supposed to be the next step in Mr. Saied’s plan to remake the country’s political system, one that he claims will be a truer, more direct democracy. In reality, it has put nearly all power in his hands, unchecked.A photo released by the Tunisian presidency shows President Kais Saied at a polling station during the first round of parliamentary elections in Tunis in December.Tunisian Presidency, via ia ReutersFar from saving the country from economic and political crises, as many hoped he would after he seized power, the president has offered few solutions as Tunisia staggers through a downturn that has left shelves bare of basics such as sugar and bottled water, families hard-pressed to feed themselves and the government unable to pay salaries.Disenchantment with Mr. Saied’s handling of the economy appeared to be a major factor in the meager turnout in July’s constitutional referendum, where about 30 percent of voters approved the president’s new Constitution.Mr. Saied had called on supporters to vote for the new charter, but after announcing the date of the parliamentary election — the first round was in December — Mr. Saied did little to promote the vote.That, Mr. Cherif said, “confirms that he sees little interest in parliamentary democracy.”Mr. Saied has never been shy about his contempt for Parliament.“Approximately 90 percent didn’t take part in voting because the Parliament, for them, doesn’t mean anything anymore,” he said in a meeting with his prime minister on Monday, according to a video his office posted on Facebook.He had a point.Police officers outside a polling station in Tunis on Sunday.Mohamed Messara/EPA, via ShutterstockMany Tunisians continue to blame the political parties who dominated Parliament over the last decade for stymying Mr. Saied’s reforms, giving him an opening to ban them from the electoral process. Anti-Saied protests remain limited.Though reliable polling is also scarce, the president’s political opponents appear even more unpopular than he is, leaving Tunisians stuck between two unpalatable choices.Still, growing numbers have expressed fear of Mr. Saied’s increasing authoritarianism as the president prosecutes and jails critics. A political activist, Chaima Issa, was questioned last week by a military judge over critical comments she made about Mr. Saied on the radio, while a former prime minister from a major opposition party, Ali Laarayedh, was imprisoned in December.Yet the outcry over Mr. Saied’s rollback of rights and freedoms Tunisians won after the 2011 Arab Spring uprising has remained limited — apart from members of the opposition, who used the flop of the elections to call for Mr. Saied’s resignation and early presidential elections to replace him.“The results show that 89 percent of Tunisians have ignored this charade,” Ahmed Najib Chebbi, a veteran politician who leads the National Salvation Front, a coalition of opposition factions, said at a news conference after the runoff vote. More

    • 138 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      States Push for New Voting Laws With an Eye Toward 2024

      by

      Republicans are focused on voter ID rules and making it harder to cast mail ballots, while Democrats are seeking to expand access through automatic voter registration.The tug of war over voting rights and rules is playing out with fresh urgency at the state level, as Republicans and Democrats fight to get new laws on the books before the 2024 presidential election.Republicans have pushed to tighten voting laws with renewed vigor since former President Donald J. Trump made baseless claims of fraud after losing the 2020 election, while Democrats coming off midterm successes are trying to channel their momentum to expand voting access and thwart efforts to undermine elections.States like Florida, Texas and Georgia, where Republicans control the levers of state government, have already passed sweeping voting restrictions that include criminal oversight initiatives, limits on drop boxes, new identification requirements and more.While President Biden and Democrats in Congress were unable to pass federal legislation last year that would protect voting access and restore elements of the landmark Voting Rights Act stripped away by the Supreme Court in 2013, not all reform efforts have floundered.In December, Congress updated the Electoral Count Act, closing a loophole that Mr. Trump’s supporters had sought to exploit to try to get Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the 2020 election results on the day of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.Now the focus has returned to the state level. Here are some of the key voting measures in play this year:Ohio Republicans approve new restrictions.Ohioans must now present a driver’s license, passport or other official photo ID to vote in person under a G.O.P. measure that was signed into law on Jan. 6 by Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican.The law also set tighter deadlines for voters to return mail-in ballots and provide missing information on them. Absentee ballot requests must be received earlier as well.Republicans, who control the Legislature in Ohio, contend that the new rules will bolster election integrity, yet they have acknowledged that the issue has not presented a problem in the state. Overall, voter fraud is exceedingly rare.Several voting rights groups were quick to file a federal lawsuit challenging the changes, which they said would disenfranchise Black people, younger and older voters, as well as those serving in the military and living abroad.Texas G.O.P. targets election crimes and ballot initiatives.Despite enacting sweeping restrictions on voting in 2021 that were condemned by civil rights groups and the Justice Department in several lawsuits, Republican lawmakers in Texas are seeking to push the envelope further.Politics Across the United StatesFrom the halls of government to the campaign trail, here’s a look at the political landscape in America.2023 Races: Governors’ contests in Kentucky, Louisiana and Mississippi and mayoral elections in Chicago and Philadelphia are among the races to watch this year.Democrats’ New Power: After winning trifectas in four state governments in the midterms, Democrats have a level of control in statehouses not seen since 2009.G.O.P. Debates: The Republican National Committee has asked several major TV networks to consider sponsoring debates, an intriguing show of détente toward the mainstream media and an early sign that the party is making plans for a contested 2024 presidential primary.An Important Election: The winner of a seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court in April will determine who holds a 4-to-3 majority in a critical presidential battleground state.Dozens of bills related to voting rules and election administration were filed for the legislative session that began this month. While many are from Democrats seeking to ease barriers to voting, Republicans control both chambers of the Texas Legislature and the governor’s office. It is not clear which bills will gain the necessary support to become laws.Some G.O.P. proposals focus on election crimes, including one that would authorize the secretary of state to designate an election marshal responsible for investigating potential election violations.“Similar bills have passed in Florida and in Georgia,” said Jasleen Singh, a counsel in the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. “We should be concerned about whether this will happen in Texas as well.”Under another bill, a voter could request that the secretary of state review local election orders and language on ballot propositions and reject any that are found to be “misleading, inaccurate or prejudicial,” part of a push by Republicans in several states to make it harder to pass ballot measures after years of progressive victories.One proposal appears to target heavily populated, Democratic-controlled counties, giving the state attorney general the power to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate voter fraud allegations if local officials decline to do so. Another bill goes further, allowing the attorney general to seek an injunction against local prosecutors who don’t investigate claims of voter fraud and pursue civil penalties against them.A 19-year-old registering to vote in Minnesota, where Democrats introduced a bill that would allow applicants who are at least 16 years old to preregister to vote. Tim Gruber for The New York TimesDemocrats in Minnesota and Michigan go on offense.Democrats are seeking to harness their momentum from the midterm elections to expand voting access in Minnesota and Michigan, where they swept the governors’ races and legislative control.In Minnesota, the party introduced legislation in early January that would create an automatic voter registration system and allow applicants who are at least 16 years old to preregister to vote. The measure would also automatically restore the voting rights of convicted felons upon their release from prison and for those who do not receive prison time as part of a sentence.In Michigan, voters approved a constitutional amendment in November that creates a nine-day early voting period and requires the state to fund absentee ballot drop boxes. Top Democrats in the state are also weighing automatic voter registration and have discussed criminalizing election misinformation.Pennsylvania Republicans want to expand a voter ID law.Because of the veto power of the governor, an office the Democrats held in the November election, Republicans in Pennsylvania have resorted to trying to amend the state constitution in order to pass a voter ID bill.The complex amendment process, which ultimately requires putting the question to voters, is the subject of pending litigation.Both chambers of the Legislature need to pass the bill this session in order to place it on the ballot, but Democrats narrowly flipped control of the House in the midterms — and they will seek to bolster their majority with three special elections next month.“If the chips fall in a certain way, it is unlikely that this will move forward and it might quite possibly be dead,” said Susan Gobreski, a board member of the League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania. “But it ain’t dead yet.”Gov. Josh Shapiro has indicated an openness to compromise with Republicans on some voting rules.“I’m certainly willing to have an honest conversation about voter I.D., as long as that is something that is not used as a hindrance to voting,” Mr. Shapiro said in an interview in December.First-time voters and those applying for absentee ballots are currently required to present identification in Pennsylvania, but Republicans want to expand the requirement to all voters in every election and have proposed issuing voter ID cards. Critics say the proposal would make it harder to vote and could compromise privacy.Mr. Shapiro has separately said he hoped that Republicans in the legislature would agree to change the state’s law that forbids the processing of absentee ballots and early votes before Election Day. The ballot procedures, which can drag out the counting, have been a flash point in a series of election lawsuits filed by Republicans.Georgia’s top election official, a Republican, calls to end runoff system.Early voting fell precipitously in Georgia’s nationally watched Senate runoff in December after Republicans, who control of state government, cut in half the number of days for casting ballots before Election Day.Long lines at some early-voting sites, especially in the Atlanta area, during the runoff led to complaints of voter suppression.But the G.O.P. lost the contest, after a set of runoff defeats a year earlier that gave Democrats control of the Senate.Now Brad Raffensperger, a Republican who is Georgia’s secretary of state and its top election official, wants to abandon the runoff system altogether, saying that the condensed timeline had put added strain on poll workers.Critics of ranked-choice voting cited the system as being instrumental to the re-election last year of Senator Lisa Murkowski, a centrist Republican.Ash Adams for The New York TimesRepublicans in Alaska want to undo some voting changes approved in 2020.After a special election last year and the midterms, when Alaska employed a novel election system for the first time, some conservatives reeling from losses at the polls have directed their ire at a common target: ranked-choice voting.At least three Republican lawmakers have introduced bills seeking to repeal some of the electoral changes that were narrowly approved by voters in 2020, which introduced a “top-four” open primary and ranked-choice voting in general elections. In addition to deciding winners based on the candidate who receives the most votes, the bills also seek to return to a closed primary system, in which only registered party members can participate.Supporters of the new system contend that it sets a higher bar to get elected than to simply earn a plurality of votes.But critics have called the format confusing. Some have blamed it for the defeat of Sarah Palin, the Republican former governor and 2008 vice-presidential nominee, in a special House election in August and again in November for the same office.They also cited the system as being instrumental to the re-election last year of Senator Lisa Murkowski, a centrist Republican who angered some members of her party when she voted to convict Mr. Trump at his impeachment trial after the Jan. 6 attack.Still, Republican foes of ranked-choice elections could face hurdles within their own party. According to The Anchorage Daily News, the incoming Senate president, a Republican, favors keeping the system in place.Nebraska Republicans aim to sharply curb mail voting.Nebraska does not require voters to provide a reason to vote early by mail, but two Republican state senators want to make wholesale changes that would mostly require in-person voting on Election Day.Under a bill proposed by Steve Halloran and Steve Erdman, G.O.P. senators in the unicameral legislature, only members of the U.S. military and residents of nursing homes and assisted living facilities could vote by mail.The measure would further require all ballots to be counted on Election Day, which would become a state holiday in Nebraska, along with the day of the statewide primary.The League of Women Voters of Nebraska opposes the bill and noted that 11 of the state’s 93 counties vote entirely by mail under a provision that gives officials in counties with under 10,000 people the option to do so.“This is an extreme bill and would be very unpopular,” MaryLee Mouton, the league’s president, said in an email. “When most states are moving to expand voting by mail, a bill to restrict vote by mail would negatively impact both our rural and urban communities.”In the November election, Nebraskans overwhelmingly approved a ballot initiative that created a statewide photo ID requirement for voting.A Republican bill in Missouri would hunt for election fraud.In Missouri, where Republicans control the governor’s office and Legislature, one G.O.P. bill would create an Office of Election Crimes and Security. The office would report to the secretary of state and would be responsible for reviewing election fraud complaints and conducting investigations.Its investigators would also be authorized to enter poling places or offices of any election authority on Election Day, during absentee voting or the canvass of votes. More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Israel’s New Hard-Line Government Raises Hackles Ahead of Inauguration

      by

      The country’s president warned the far-right incoming minister of national security that he was raising alarms at home and abroad over racism, discrimination and undermining democracy.JERUSALEM — Israel’s incoming prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, concluded coalition agreements on Wednesday to form the most right-wing and religiously conservative government in the country’s history, a day ahead of an expected vote in Parliament to install the new leaders.The coalition pledged to expand Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank, a move that will deepen the conflict with the Palestinians. And its members agreed to prioritize potentially far-reaching changes that would curb the power and influence of the independent judiciary, one of a number of measures that critics warn risk damaging Israel’s democratic system and paving the way for racism and discrimination against minorities.Even before the swearing-in ceremony on Thursday, a broad public backlash against the government prompted an unusual intervention by Israel’s president, Isaac Herzog, who reflected the alarm in some constituencies at home and abroad over the most contentious clauses in the coalition agreements.Mr. Herzog summoned Itamar Ben-Gvir, the leader of Jewish Power, an ultranationalist party, and the incoming minister of national security, for a meeting and conveyed “voices from large sections of the nation and the Jewish world concerned about the incoming government,” the president’s office said. He urged Mr. Ben-Gvir “to calm the stormy winds.”The president is a largely ceremonial figurehead who has no legal authority to influence the new government, but his voice carries moral weight and is supposed to unify Israelis.Mr. Ben-Gvir told Mr. Herzog that he and the new government “will pursue a broad national policy for the sake of all parts of Israeli society,” according to the statement from the president’s office.The meeting came the same morning that the coalition agreements reached between the partners of the incoming government were presented to Parliament on Wednesday, a final step required a day before the vote in Parliament to approve the new coalition.What to Know About Israel’s New GovernmentNetanyahu’s Return: Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, is set to return to power at the helm of the most right-wing administration in Israeli history.The Far Right’s Rise: To win election, Mr. Netanyahu and his far-right allies harnessed perceived threats to Israel’s Jewish identity after ethnic unrest and the subsequent inclusion of Arab lawmakers in the government.Arab Allies: Mr. Netanyahu’s far-right allies have a history of making anti-Arab statements. Three Arab countries that normalized relations with Israel in 2020 appear unconcerned.Worries Among Palestinians: To some Palestinians, the rise of Israel’s far right can scarcely make things worse. But many fear a surge of violence.The government’s guidelines began with a declaration of the Jewish people’s “exclusive and inalienable right to all parts of the Land of Israel” and pledged to bolster Jewish settlement in all areas, including the occupied West Bank — a statement that reflected this government’s abandonment of the internationally recognized formula for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict based on the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel.“We have achieved the goal,” Mr. Netanyahu told his Likud party lawmakers on Wednesday as the intense coalition negotiations came to an end nearly two months after the Nov. 1 election.“A huge public in Israel — more than two million Israelis — voted for the national camp led by us,” he said. “We will establish a stable government that will last its full term and serve all the citizens of Israel.”Israel’s incoming prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, of the Likud party, campaigning in the city of Sderot in October. Mr. Netanyahu is set to return to office 18 months after he was ousted.Amit Elkayam for The New York TimesBut the agreements were already causing strains with the Jewish diaspora, and particularly with the largely non-Orthodox community in North America, and are raising concerns regarding Israel’s international standing.More than a hundred retired Israeli ambassadors and senior Foreign Ministry officials signed a letter to Mr. Netanyahu on Wednesday expressing their “profound concern” at the potential harm to Israel’s strategic relations, first and foremost with the United States, arising from the apparent policies of the incoming government.In an interview with CNN, King Abdullah II of Jordan said he was “prepared to get into a conflict” if Israel crossed red lines and tried to change the status of a Jerusalem holy site revered by Muslims and Jews, and over which Jordan has custodianship. Jordan and Israel signed a peace treaty in 1994, but relations between King Abdullah and Mr. Netanyahu have long been tense.Mr. Netanyahu, Israel’s longest serving prime minister, is set to return to office 18 months after he was ousted. On trial for corruption, he has grown ever more dependent on his hard-line allies because the more liberal parties refuse to sit in a government led by a premier under criminal indictment.One of the most controversial elements of the new government’s plans is the prioritization of changes to the judiciary, including legislation that will allow Parliament to override Supreme Court rulings. This would limit the influence of the independent judiciary, which has played an important role in preserving minority rights in a country that lacks a formal constitution, and would give more unchecked power to the political majority.But coalition agreements are not binding, and many of their clauses remain on paper, never materializing. The clauses about the judiciary are vague and provide little detail about what will be changed, how or by when. The proposal to allow Parliament to override Supreme Court rulings, for example, does not specify whether a simple Parliamentary majority of 61 of the 120 lawmakers will be enough to strike down a Supreme Court decision or if a special majority will be required.Mr. Ben-Gvir was convicted in the past on charges of inciting racism and of support for a terrorist group and ran in the election on a bullish ticket of fighting organized crime and increasing governance, particularly in areas heavily populated by members of Israel’s Arab minority.This week, Parliament passed legislation expanding ministerial powers over the police in a way that critics say will allow Mr. Ben-Gvir to politicize the force’s operations. The coalition agreement states that he will have the authority to change open-fire regulations, potentially allowing the police a freer hand that could fuel tensions with Arab citizens of Israel.Mr. Ben-Gvir and his allies have insisted that the coalition agreements include promises to amend the current anti-discrimination law, which applies to businesses and service providers, to allow them to refuse to provide a service that is contrary to their religious beliefs and to hold gender-segregated events.Israelis demonstrating against the new government of Mr. Netanyahu this month in Jerusalem.Mostafa Alkharouf/Anadolu Agency, via Getty ImagesFar-right lawmakers suggested this week that meant that doctors could refuse to provide treatments that go against their religious conscience — for example, providing fertility treatment to a person in a same-sex relationship — or that hoteliers could turn away certain customers.Their statements set off a public uproar and forced Mr. Netanyahu to issue clarifications saying that no discrimination will be tolerated against the L.G.B.T.Q. community or any other sections of Israeli society, even though his conservative Likud party is a signatory to the coalition agreements.Israeli banks, insurance companies, medical professionals, legal experts and business leaders have denounced the proposed amendments and stated that they will not cooperate with any discriminatory conduct in their fields.Gabby Sobelman contributed reporting from Rehovot, Israel. More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Cyril Ramaphosa Unlikely to Face Impeachment in South Africa

      by

      Leaders of the governing African National Congress said they opposed holding an impeachment hearing for President Cyril Ramaphosa over a scandal involving cash stolen from a couch at his game farm.JOHANNESBURG — South Africa’s governing party, the African National Congress, is standing by its president, Cyril Ramaphosa, rejecting calls that he face an impeachment hearing over accusations that he kept a large sum of cash in a sofa at his game farm and failed to report a crime when it was stolen.The decision by the executive committee of the A.N.C. was announced on Monday after an all-day meeting — essentially killing a report that had been prepared by a three-member panel recommending that impeachment hearings go ahead.“It means the president continues with his duties as president of the A.N.C. and the republic,” Paul Mashatile, the A.N.C.’s treasurer general, said at a news conference after the meeting. “The decision that we take is in the best interest of the country.”But the president is hardly out of the woods. He still has to answer to several other investigations, including by the A.N.C.’s integrity committee, the national prosecutor’s office and the public protector, a corruption watchdog, as Mr. Mashatile pointed out. And his bid to win a second term as A.N.C. president in elections to be held in less than two weeks is hardly a sure thing.Mr. Ramaphosa has been under fire since a criminal complaint filed by a political foe in June alleged that millions of dollars in U.S. currency was stolen from a couch in a game farm, Phala Phala Wildlife, owned by the president. The complaint alleged that Mr. Ramaphosa never reported the theft and tried to cover it up to avoid the publicity — and potential legal violations — over having that much foreign currency hidden at his private residence.A damning report issued last week by two retired judges and a lawyer said that he might have violated the Constitution, and recommended that Parliament begin impeachment hearings. On Monday, Mr. Ramaphosa filed a legal challenge in the nation’s highest court challenging the report.Parliament was scheduled to convene on Tuesday to vote on whether to adopt the report and hold impeachment hearings, but that meeting was delayed until next week. A.N.C. members hold a majority of the seats in Parliament. While they are not required to do what their executive committee says, analysts say it is highly unlikely that they will break ranks in what is expected to be a public vote.What to Know About Cyril Ramaphosa and ‘Farmgate’Card 1 of 3Who is Cyril Ramaphosa? More