Politics

(NEW YORK) — As the midterm elections approach later this year, some states and jurisdictions have required voting ballots to be made available in other languages besides English.

The Latino population continues to grow in the United States and some counties have mandated that ballots in Spanish are available at polling sites.

However, Spanish and non-English ballots are not required across the nation, though some advocates say that multilingual ballots are critical for democracy.

“We need to have bilingual ballots, bilingual material across the country, it should be a national requirement and a national norm,” said Domingo Garcia, the national president for the League of United Latin American Citizens.

In the 2020 U.S. Census data, the Latino population accounted for over 60 million people. Yet, according to a study conducted by the City University of New York, only 10.6% of Latinos voted in the 2020 elections.

Some advocates believe that one of the reasons behind this lagging voting number is a language barrier.

“When we look at the language barrier, it is voter suppression, right? It is discriminatory against eligible citizens who … have the right to access ballots,” said League of United Latin American Citizens Chief Executive Director Sindy Benavides.

Benavides said the need for ballot materials in Spanish include a need for other voting resources, such as interpreters, bilingual ballot directors and even flyers that can influence voter turnout.

“The requirements are very straightforward. … All election information that is available in English must also be available in the minority language so that all citizens have the opportunity to register and to participate in elections and be able to cast a free and effective ballot,” said Benavides. “We know that language barrier is directly tied to low voter turnout.”

The areas of impact

Across the nation, at least 331 U.S. jurisdictions are required by law to offer language assistance to specific groups. But that number only makes for 4.1% of the 2,920 counties and 5,120 minor civil divisions that constitute the political subdivisions in U.S. Section 203 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

“In our own backyard, across the entire United States — Ohio, Utah, Maryland, Virginia, Georgia, you name it — we are touching every single state and one fact that is true, is that the Latino community will continue to grow for decades to come,” said Benavides.

According to U.S. Section 203, if over 5% of a township or county’s voting-age citizens are limited in English proficiency they need to be covered by language provisions within the Voting Rights Act, according to the U.S. Census.

Just last month, in the Washington, D.C., area, Prince George’s County in Maryland and Prince William County in Virginia mandated ballots in Spanish to accommodate their significant Latino populations.

But in Georgia, Latino activists have pushed for Spanish-language ballots in Hall County, where 28% of all residents are Hispanic, according to Census data.

“What we’ve heard specifically from the community has been that not having information in Spanish limits their ability to be able to freely and openly participate,” said Jerry Gonzalez, founder and CEO of the Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials, or GALEO.

“Our community really takes voting very seriously, and they want to be informed and educated about what’s on the ballot,” said Gonzalez. “Sometimes not knowing what’s on the ballot, because they can’t read it in Spanish, makes them hesitant to actually cast a ballot and it prevents people from voting.”

In November 2020, according to a report from GALEO, there were 385,185 Latino voters, representing 4.1% of the total electorate in Georgia. When compared to the 2016 analysis, the Latino electorate in the state grew by 140,995 Latino registered voters, representing a growth rate of 57.7%.

“Our effort is to make sure that we educate our community in both English and Spanish about the importance of their vote and also the importance of these elections and how consequential they are for us moving our community forward,” said Gonzalez.

Hall County, Georgia, Elections Director Lori Wurtz told the Gainesville Times in December that Spanish ballots in the county would not be reevaluated for another five years, however, after that evaluation, she foresees the county qualifying for bilingual ballots. According to the U.S Census, jurisdictions are evaluated every five years using data from the American Community Survey.

“When we are tapped to do this, we’re ready,” Wurtz told the outlet.

Need for change

This week, the Senate will meet to discuss voting rights. However, Gonzalez emphasizes the need to also have “language barrier” as part of the U.S. Voting Rights Act.

This would be a key addition for Puerto Ricans, who have the right to vote in the United States as American citizens. If Puerto Ricans move to one of the 50 states, they are allowed to vote in federal elections, but they might not feel confident to do so with Spanish being the main language spoken on the island.

“It is important for Puerto Ricans to vote in the language that they understand, because there are now more Puerto Ricans living on the mainland,” said Kira Romero-Craft from Latino Justice Puerto Rico Legal Defense Educational Fund.

“If they want to influence Congress to impact the island then Puerto Ricans need to vote,” she told ABC News. “Puerto Rico, to me, is like the perfect example of why we need to care and why we need to engage and vote as if our life depended on it — because it does.”

Although a language barrier continues to be an ongoing issue in some states, advocates are calling on Latinos to go out and take to the polls regardless of current circumstances that may affect them.

“Your vote counts; your voice is your vote. And right now, more than ever, if you want immigration reform, then you got to vote to make sure that you have a congressperson or senator that will represent your points of view,” said Garcia.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden will announce a nearly $27 billion investment Friday to fund repairs and replace bridges in need.

The Department of Transportation will launch the Bridge Replacement, Rehabilitation, Preservation, Protection, and Construction Program, which will provide $26.5 billion to states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico over five years and $825 million for tribal transportation facilities.

“The Biden-Harris Administration is thrilled to launch this program to fix thousands of bridges across the country — the single largest dedicated bridge investment since the construction of the Interstate highway system,” Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said in a statement. “Modernizing America’s bridges will help improve safety, support economic growth, and make people’s lives better in every part of the country — across rural, suburban, urban, and tribal communities.”

The funding is part of the bipartisan infrastructure package that Biden signed into law in November. While the program is slated to help repair thousands of bridges across the country, the administration is also seeking to use the program to increase resiliency when it comes to climate change, as well as make bridges safer for cyclists and pedestrians.

Across the country, the program is expected to help repair approximately 15,000 highway bridges, and will be allocated to each state according to a needs-based formula — though the choice of which projects are undertaken are left up to the states.

While the funding for fiscal year 2022 is being released immediately, states will learn their funding totals for the full five years of the program in order to plan ahead, a senior administration official told reporters.

“As part of this announcement, the Federal Highway Administration will distribute $5.3 billion to states, D.C. and Puerto Rico for the current federal fiscal year, along with $165 million to tribes,” the official said.

Some of the states set to receive the most funding include Pennsylvania, Illinois, California and New York.

In addition to providing funds to states to replace and repair highway bridges, the program has dedicated funding for “off-system” bridges, which are often locally owned and not part of the federal highway system.

“While states generally must match federal funding with up to 20% state or local funding, the bipartisan infrastructure law allows the use of federal funds to pay for the entire cost — 100% of the cost — of repairing or rehabilitating locally owned off-system bridges,” the official stressed.

“The department encourages governors and states to take advantage of this incentive to make their federal dollars go further by focusing on local bridges,” they added.

Pressed on how the administration planned to enforce its desire to focus funds on repairs for existing bridges, and emphasizing equity when new bridges are constructed, particularly in Republican-run states, the official brushed off the concern.

“Bridges in general are neither red nor blue. They’re an important piece of infrastructure in communities,” the official said. “And the state transportation departments have a good track record of investing in bridges based on the condition of those bridges. And we’re confident that with these funds and with the guidance we’ve provided and with the conversations that we’ve been having with them, they’re going to be directing the funds to the bridges that are in most need of repair.”

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — As President Joe Biden headed to Capitol Hill on Thursday in an attempt to persuade Democratic lawmakers to back a major change to the Senate’s rules that would allow voting rights legislation to move forward, two key Democratic senators again rejected the idea.

Making the trip risked his political capital, after delivering an impassioned speech Tuesday in which he said there was “no option” except for senators to do away with the filibuster — a rule that requires 60 votes, rather than a simple majority of 50, to advance most legislation — if the bills could not be advanced another way.

“I’ve been having these quiet conversations with members of Congress for the last two months,” he said Tuesday. “I’m tired of being quiet!”

The president entered the Democratic caucus room to applause shortly after 1 p.m.

But Biden quickly faced a losing battle in transforming his rhetoric into action as a pair of Democratic senators — Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona — repeated their steadfast opposition to changing the filibuster.

Even as he headed to Capitol Hill Thursday, Sinema made a Senate floor speech saying she would not support changing the rule.

“There’s no need for me to restate my longstanding support for the 60-vote threshold to pass legislation. There’s no need for me to restate its role in protecting our country from wild reversals of federal policy,” Sinema said. “This week’s harried discussions about Senate rules are but a poor substitute for what I believe could have and should have been a thoughtful public debate at any time over the past year.”

“Demands to eliminate this threshold from whichever party holds the fleeting majority amount to a group of people separated on two sides of a canyon, shouting that solution to their colleagues,” she added.

And soon after, Manchin told reporters he thought Sinema did a “great job” in her floor speech and said that the Senate needs “rules changes” but “not getting rid of the filibuster” — a blow to Biden before he even arrived on the Hill for the Democratic caucus lunch.

After emerging from the closed-door meeting with Senate Democrats, Biden said, “The honest to God answer is, I don’t know whether we can get this done.” He added, “I hope we can get this done, but I’m not sure. But one thing for certain, one thing for certain. Like every other major civil rights bill that came along, if we miss the first time, we can come back and try it a second time. We missed this time.”

He referred to efforts in Republican-led states to pass more restrictive voting laws. “The state legislative bodies continue to change the law, not as to who can vote, but who gets to count the vote. Count the vote. Count the vote. It’s about election subversion, not just whether or not people get to vote: who counts the vote. That’s what it’s about. That’s what makes this so different than anything else we’ve ever done.”

Biden has made clear this week who he thinks would be to blame if he’s unsuccessful: Republicans, who he said Tuesday were choosing the side of standing in the way of advancing civil rights if they block the bills.

And all 50 Republican senators oppose the bills, which Democrats say are needed to create national standards for making voting more accessible and to put a check on new state laws that make it more difficult for members of minority groups and others to cast their ballots.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell appeared visibly angry Wednesday as he blasted Biden’s speech, calling it “profoundly, profoundly unpresidential.” He deemed the remarks a “rant” that “was incoherent, incorrect and beneath his office.”

When asked by ABC News about McConnell’s rebuke, Biden said: “I like Mitch McConnell. He’s a friend.”

Despite Biden’s support for a carveout to the filibuster, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced Wednesday that Democrats planned to use existing rules to prevent Republicans from using the filibuster to block debate from starting.

House Democrats are expected to replace an existing piece of legislation — one that would not require a vote for debate to begin — with both the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, allowing them to bypass Republicans’ attempts to block the legislation from debate.

“The Senate will finally debate voting rights legislation, and then every Senator will be faced with a choice of whether or not to pass the legislation to protect our democracy,” Schumer wrote in a memo to the Democratic Caucus Wednesday.

Still, Republicans will have another opportunity to block the bill from passing by filibustering before debate ends. Without changing the rules around the filibuster, the legislation will still require 60 votes to pass.

Biden, a veteran of the Senate and a self-described “institutionalist,” has undergone an evolution in his view of the filibuster during the first year as president.

In an interview in March, Biden told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos that he supports bringing back the “talking filibuster,” a version of the rule that would require a senator to “stand up and command the floor” and “keep talking” in order to hold up legislation.

Biden went further during a CNN town hall in October, noting that he would be open to “fundamentally altering” the filibuster on issues of particular consequence like voting rights.

But Biden’s most definitive comments came in December while speaking with ABC News’ David Muir, saying he would support a carveout to the filibuster in order to pass the voting rights legislation if that was the “only thing” standing in the way.

“If the only thing standing between getting voting rights legislation passed and not getting passed is the filibuster, I support making the exception of voting rights for the filibuster,” Biden told Muir.

ABC News’ Trish Turner and Allison Pecorin contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden headed to Capitol Hill Thursday in an attempt to persuade Democratic lawmakers to back a major change to the Senate’s rules that would allow a pair of voting rights bills to move forward.

The trip amounts to him putting his money where his mouth is, after delivering an impassioned speech Tuesday in which he said there was “no option” except for senators to do away with the filibuster — a rule that requires 60 votes, rather than a simple majority of 50, to advance most legislation — if the bills could not be advanced another way.

“I’ve been having these quiet conversations with members of Congress for the last two months,” he said Tuesday. “I’m tired of being quiet!”

The White House has said that in the wake of his speech in Atlanta — where Biden was joined by Vice President Kamala Harris — Biden and Harris “will be working the phones over the next several days pushing members of the Senate to support voting rights legislation and changes to Senate rules.”

On Thursday, the White House said, Biden will meet with Senate Democrats “to discuss the urgent need to pass legislation to protect the constitutional right to vote” and “again underline that doing so requires changing the rules of the Senate to make the institution work again.”

But Biden faces an uphill battle transforming rhetoric into action. A pair of Democratic senators — Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona — have remained intransigent in their opposition to taking such a step.

Sinema reiterated in a Senate floor speech Thursday, as Biden prepared to head to the Hill, that she would not support changing the rule.

“There’s no need for me to restate my longstanding support for the 60-vote threshold to pass legislation. There’s no need for me to restate its role in protecting our country from wild reversals of federal policy,” Sinema said. “This week’s harried discussions about Senate rules are but a poor substitute for what I believe could have and should have been a thoughtful public debate at any time over the past year.”

“Demands to eliminate this threshold from whichever party holds the fleeting majority amount to a group of people separated on two sides of a canyon, shouting that solution to their colleagues,” she added.

With prospects of passage so uncertain even after his fiery speech, the president is risking his political capital, particularly as he struggles to get another domestic priority — his “Build Back Better” social legislation — through the Senate.

Biden has made clear this week who he thinks would be to blame if he’s unsuccessful: Republicans, who he said Tuesday were choosing the side of standing in the way of advancing civil rights if they block the bills.

And all 50 Republican senators oppose the bills, which Democrats say are needed to create national standards for making voting more accessible and to put a check on new state laws that make it more difficult for members of minority groups and others to cast their ballots.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell appeared visibly angry Wednesday as he blasted Biden’s speech, calling it “profoundly, profoundly unpresidential.” He deemed the remarks a “rant” that “was incoherent, incorrect and beneath his office.”

When asked by ABC News about McConnell’s rebuke, Biden said: “I like Mitch McConnell. He’s a friend.”

Despite Biden’s support for a carveout to the filibuster, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced Wednesday that Democrats planned to use existing rules to prevent Republicans from using the filibuster to block debate from starting.

House Democrats are expected to replace an existing piece of legislation — one that would not require a vote for debate to begin — with both the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, allowing them to bypass Republicans’ attempts to block the legislation from debate.

“The Senate will finally debate voting rights legislation, and then every Senator will be faced with a choice of whether or not to pass the legislation to protect our democracy,” Schumer wrote in a memo to the Democratic Caucus Wednesday.

Still, Republicans will have another opportunity to block the bill from passing by filibustering before debate ends. Without changing the rules around the filibuster, the legislation will still require 60 votes to pass.

Biden, a veteran of the Senate and a self-described “institutionalist,” has undergone an evolution in his view of the filibuster during the first year as president.

In an interview in March, Biden told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos that he supports bringing back the “talking filibuster,” a version of the rule that would require a senator to “stand up and command the floor” and “keep talking” in order to hold up legislation.

Biden went further during a CNN town hall in October, noting that he would be open to “fundamentally altering” the filibuster on issues of particular consequence like voting rights.

But Biden’s most definitive comments came in December while speaking with ABC News’ David Muir, saying he would support a carveout to the filibuster in order to pass the voting rights legislation if that was the “only thing” standing in the way.

“If the only thing standing between getting voting rights legislation passed and not getting passed is the filibuster, I support making the exception of voting rights for the filibuster,” Biden told Muir.

ABC News’ Trish Turner and Allison Pecorin contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden is expected to head to Capitol Hill on Thursday in an attempt to persuade Democratic lawmakers to back a major change to the Senate’s rules that would allow a pair of voting rights bills to move forward.

The trip amounts to him putting his money where his mouth is, after delivering an impassioned speech Tuesday in which he said there was “no option” except for senators to do away with the filibuster — a rule that requires 60 votes, rather than a simple majority of 50, to advance most legislation — if the bills could not be advanced another way.

“I’ve been having these quiet conversations with members of Congress for the last two months,” he said Tuesday. “I’m tired of being quiet!”

The White House has said that in the wake of his speech in Atlanta — where Biden was joined by Vice President Kamala Harris — Biden and Harris “will be working the phones over the next several days pushing members of the Senate to support voting rights legislation and changes to Senate rules.”

On Thursday, the White House said, Biden will meet with Senate Democrats “to discuss the urgent need to pass legislation to protect the constitutional right to vote” and “again underline that doing so requires changing the rules of the Senate to make the institution work again.”

But Biden faces an uphill battle transforming rhetoric into action. A pair of Democratic senators — Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona — have remained intransigent in their opposition to taking such a step.

With prospects of passage so uncertain even after his fiery speech, the president is risking his political capital, particularly as he struggles to get another domestic priority — his “Build Back Better” social legislation — through the Senate.

Biden has made clear this week who he thinks would be to blame if he’s unsuccessful: Republicans, who he said Tuesday were choosing the side of standing in the way of advancing civil rights if they block the bills.

And all 50 Republican senators oppose the bills, which Democrats say are needed to create national standards for making voting more accessible and to put a check on new state laws that make it more difficult for members of minority groups and others to cast their ballots.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell appeared visibly angry Wednesday as he blasted Biden’s speech, calling it “profoundly, profoundly unpresidential.” He deemed the remarks a “rant” that “was incoherent, incorrect and beneath his office.”

When asked by ABC News about McConnell’s rebuke, Biden said: “I like Mitch McConnell. He’s a friend.”

Despite Biden’s support for a carveout to the filibuster, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced Wednesday that Democrats planned to use existing rules to prevent Republicans from using the filibuster to block debate from starting.

House Democrats are expected to replace an existing piece of legislation — one that would not require a vote for debate to begin — with both the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, allowing them to bypass Republicans’ attempts to block the legislation from debate.

“The Senate will finally debate voting rights legislation, and then every Senator will be faced with a choice of whether or not to pass the legislation to protect our democracy,” Schumer wrote in a memo to the Democratic Caucus Wednesday.

Still, Republicans will have another opportunity to block the bill from passing by filibustering before debate ends. Without changing the rules around the filibuster, the legislation will still require 60 votes to pass.

Biden, a veteran of the Senate and a self-described “institutionalist,” has undergone an evolution in his view of the filibuster during the first year as president.

In an interview in March, Biden told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos that he supports bringing back the “talking filibuster,” a version of the rule that would require a senator to “stand up and command the floor” and “keep talking” in order to hold up legislation.

Biden went further during a CNN town hall in October, noting that he would be open to “fundamentally altering” the filibuster on issues of particular consequence like voting rights.

But Biden’s most definitive comments came in December while speaking with ABC News’ David Muir, saying he would support a carveout to the filibuster in order to pass the voting rights legislation if that was the “only thing” standing in the way.

“If the only thing standing between getting voting rights legislation passed and not getting passed is the filibuster, I support making the exception of voting rights for the filibuster,” Biden told Muir.

ABC News’ Trish Turner and Allison Pecorin contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(ORLANDO, Fla.) — A former girlfriend of Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, who is potentially a key witness in the ongoing federal sex trafficking investigation into the congressman, was spotted on Wednesday with her lawyer entering an Orlando federal courthouse where a grand jury has been meeting, according to a source.

The ex-girlfriend, who ABC News is not naming, could play a crucial role for investigators who are continuing to probe Gaetz’s alleged sexual conduct with a separate young woman who was 17 years old at the time.

Gaetz’s former girlfriend allegedly has knowledge not only regarding the congressman but also the one-time minor at the center of the sex trafficking investigation, sources said.

The ex-girlfriend, who previously worked on Capitol Hill, was also one of the women who was allegedly on a 2018 trip to the Bahamas with Gaetz and others, including the 17-year-old, which prosecutors are also investigating, according to legal sources familiar with the case.

A grand jury investigating the Florida congressman has been meeting at the Orlando courthouse on Wednesdays, according to multiple sources.

The news was first reported by NBC.

A spokesperson for Gaetz did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Florida congressman has vehemently denied any wrongdoing and has not been charged with any crime.

Tim Jansen, the attorney representing Gaetz’s ex-girlfriend, declined comment about the probe.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — In a major development, the House Jan. 6 select committee on Wednesday asked GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy to voluntarily cooperate with its probe.

In a letter, the committee asked him to voluntarily provide information.

It is not compelling him to provide information or sit before the committee at this time.

Chairman Bennie Thompson said in the letter that he believes McCarthy has relevant information that could speak into the facts, circumstances, and causes leading to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack.

Thompson also wants information from McCarthy about events in the days before and after Jan. 6.

“You have acknowledged speaking directly with the former President while the violence was underway on January 6th,” Thompson writes.

“The Select Committee wishes to question you regarding communications you may have had with President Trump, President Trump’s legal team, Representative Jordan, and others at the time on that topic,” Thompson writes.

McCarthy has made multiple statements about Jan. 6 and about his conversations with Trump that day.

ABC News has reached out to McCarthy’s office for comment.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — As President Joe Biden prepared to head to Capitol Hill on Thursday to rally Senate Democrats on election reform, a visibly angry Republican Leader Mitch McConnell fired back Wednesday, saying that he didn’t recognize the man who delivered the fiery speech in Georgia on voting rights one day earlier.

McConnell characterized Biden’s speech — in which the president called for the Senate to change its rules by “whichever way they need to be changed” in order to pass Democrats’ voting bills — as “profoundly, profoundly un-presidential,” deeming the remarks a “rant” that “was incoherent, incorrect and beneath his office.”

The Kentucky Republican repeatedly took issue with Biden linking Republicans to Jim Crow-era legislation for standing in the way of election reform, as at least 19 GOP-led states have passed laws in the last year that experts at the Brennan Center for Justice say restrict voting access.

“We have a sitting president — a sitting president — invoking the Civil War, shouting about totalitarianism and labeling millions of Americans his domestic enemies?” McConnell said. “Yesterday, he poured a giant can of gasoline on the fire.”

Biden, one day earlier in Atlanta, spoke forcefully in favor of changing the Senate filibuster rule so that Democrats could pass two key voting bills that have stalled in the Senate.

“Nowhere does the Constitution give a minority the right to unilaterally block legislation,” Biden said. “The American people have waited long enough. The Senate must act.”

McConnell, in turn, closed his floor speech on Wednesday by imploring his colleagues — including an indirect call to Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., whom he has courted to change parties — that it’s up to them to defend tradition in the Senate.

“Unfortunately, President Biden has rejected the ‘better angels of our nature.’ So, it is the Senate’s responsibility to protect the country. This institution was constructed as a firewall against exactly — exactly the kind of rage and false hysteria we saw on full display yesterday,” McConnell said.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer had promised to move toward a showdown on votes on Democrats’ voting legislation as soon as Wednesday.

The Democratic leader met Tuesday night with Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema — another Democrat who has not committed to a filibuster carveout but says she supports election reforms — and then with Manchin on Wednesday morning for around an hour as he navigates a way to push through Biden’s agenda.

While acknowledging he likely doesn’t have the votes to move the bills forward, Schumer said he wants to force a vote to put senators on the record to show Americans — and history — where they stand on the issue that Democrats call vital to democracy.

A recorded vote on those bills could be seen as the first move toward another vote on changing or eliminating the filibuster on the measures, which could potentially fall on Monday given the symbolism of Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

Ahead of his visit to Capitol Hill on Thursday, Biden in Atlanta on Tuesday attempted to shame the 16 sitting Republicans who voted to extend the Voting Rights Act before — to support voting rights now.

“Not a single Republican has displayed the courage to stand up to a defeated president to protect America’s right to vote, not one,” he said. “Not one.”

While Biden, having served in Congress for 36 years, has defended the filibuster in the past, he changed his tune regarding election reforms, saying Tuesday that a minority of senators shouldn’t be permitted to block actions on voting rights for all Americans.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — An analysis of preliminary data published Wednesday indicates that many candidates for top election administration roles are fundraising at a record-setting clip, with some of the biggest hauls going to those who have made 2020 election denial a central tenet of their message to voters.

In Georgia, Michigan and Minnesota, the key battleground states where data is already available, “fundraising in secretary of state races is two and a half times higher than it was by the same point in either of the last two election cycles,” according to the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonpartisan organization that tracks elections and voting rights.

Brennan Center analysts credit increased political polarization and controversy over the 2020 election for the deluge of money flooding these races, which have historically been low-profile affairs involving modest sums of fundraising.

As chief election officials in many states — who often wield immense power over the administration of federal, state and local elections — secretaries of state have taken center stage as the nation grapples with core democratic issues.

“Formerly contested on dry issues of bureaucratic processes, these elections are being infused with substantive politics, with more and more candidates making election denial, or opposition to it, central to their campaigns,” the Brennan Center authors wrote.

“Indeed, as far as we are aware,” the authors continued, “this is the first time in the modern era that questions about the legitimacy of elections have played such a prominent role in contests for election officials.”

Many Republican candidates for election administrator posts are campaigning on the false notion that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from President Donald Trump — a dangerous falsity that is rewarding those pedaling it most fervently, according to the Brennan Center analysis.

In Georgia, for example, where Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger is seeking reelection in a crowded field, challenger Rep. Jody Hice, R-Ga., who, as a member of Congress, objected to certifying President Joe Biden’s victory, outraised all other candidates — including Raffensperger — through mid-2021.

Hice landed more than $500,000 in the three months after launching his campaign, the Brennan Center found, backed by a mix of small-dollar supporters and national GOP donors such as Richard Uihlein of Uline Inc. Hice has said that if 2020 was a “fair election, it would be a different outcome.”

In Michigan, however, a different story is emerging. Through mid-October of last year, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, the Democratic incumbent, had raised $1.2 million — more than five times what she had brought in at that point in the 2018 contest.

Benson has attracted national attention for her outspoken criticism of Trump and those who have cast doubt on the 2020 presidential race.

“There is a growing understanding that what’s on the ballot in 2022 is, in some measure, nonpartisan election administration,” Larry Norden, a co-author of the report, told ABC News. “And that’s attracting a lot more money.”

While it is too early to identify the new sources of fundraising, Norden said one trend has already emerged: a flood of out-of-state donations. In Georgia, 22% of donations have come from donors based in other states, a marked uptick from 2018, when only 13% of donations came from elsewhere.

Some strategists say Trump’s proclivity to endorse loyalists up and down state and local ballots has motivated major national donors and political organizations to play a more active role in elections that, in past election cycles, would not have gotten their attention.

“[Trump and his allies are] trying to run out establishment Republicans and elect Trump loyalists at every level of government,” said Sarah Longwell, strategic director at Republican Voters Against Trump, a coalition of conservatives opposed to Trump. “Trump is running a widespread insurgent strategy that is meant to continue to undercut traditional Republican candidates.”

It is not uncommon for fundraising to increase each cycle with the cost of elections. But the amount of money being pumped into races for election administrators is unprecedented. In the coming weeks, new disclosure filings are expected to show how these campaigns fared in fundraising through the end of the year, allowing a better glimpse at where candidates stand now.

Wednesday’s reporting from the Brennan Center is the first installment in a forthcoming series on contests for governors, secretaries of state and local election officials — offices that carry an outsized role in administering the vote.

Analysts will examine fundraising trends and messaging in those races, with a particular focus on how candidates discuss the false notion that the previous election cycle was somehow compromised.

“Nowhere will this issue be more important than in the contests for the offices that will have a direct role in the administration and certification of election results,” the authors of Wednesday’s report wrote.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol attack issued three new subpoenas on Tuesday to former Trump White House aides and associates, including a speechwriter who helped craft former President Donald Trump’s speech to supporters ahead of the Capitol riot.

The panel has subpoenaed GOP operatives Arthur Schwartz and Andrew Surabian, along with Trump White House speechwriter Ross Worthington.

“The Select Committee is seeking information from individuals who were involved with the rally at the Ellipse. Protests on that day escalated into an attack on our democracy,” Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said in a statement. “We have reason to believe the individuals we’ve subpoenaed today have relevant information and we expect them to join the more than 340 individuals who have spoken with the Select Committee as we push ahead to investigate this attack on our democracy and ensure nothing like this ever happens again.”

Both Surabian and Schwartz, who have ties to Donald Trump Jr. and have been in the former president’s orbit since he first ran for president, communicated with organizers and speakers at the rally on the National Mall, the committee said, pointing to records obtained by the panel.

“While we plan on cooperating with the Committee within reason, we are bewildered as to why Mr. Surabian is being subpoenaed in the first place,” Surabian’s lawyer, Daniel Bean, told ABC News in a statement. “He had nothing at all to do with the events that took place at the Capital that day, zero involvement in organizing the rally that preceded it and was off the payroll of the Trump campaign as of November 15, 2020.”

Schwartz and Worthington did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

According to the committee, Worthington helped draft Trump’s speech that day to supporters — many of whom later marched across the National Mall to the Capitol after he encouraged them to do so.

Trump’s speech and intentions were a focus of debate during Trump’s second impeachment trial, when House Democrats charged him with inciting the riot.

His lawyers argued before the Senate that the president did not call for violence against lawmakers or Capitol Police.

The committee has asked all three witnesses to turn over records by Jan. 24 and appear for interviews at the end of the month, or early February.

To date, the panel has publicly disclosed 53 subpoenas, and investigators have obtained tens of thousands of pages of records, including some from the Trump White House, and text messages and emails provided by Mark Meadows, who served as Trump’s last White House chief of staff.

The committee, which is prepared to hold public hearings in the coming weeks, has also sought to voluntarily question GOP lawmakers involved in efforts to challenge the election results.

Reps. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Scott Perry, R-Pa., have refused to cooperate with the inquiry, and the panel has not ruled out trying to compel their testimony.

The committee is also engaging with aides and associates of former Vice President Mike Pence, who Trump and others tried to pressure to overturn the election results while he presided over the counting of the electoral votes on Jan. 6.

Longtime Pence aide Marc Short has been subpoenaed by the committee, and his attorney continues to engage with the panel regarding testimony and cooperation.

Thompson also suggested in a recent NPR interview that the committee could request to interview Pence in the coming weeks.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.