Stephen Richer When President Trump issued his March 25, 2025, executive order on election administration, both Walter Olson and I sympathized with its policy aims, but we wrote that it unlawfully usurped legislative authority and trampled on federalism. The newly unveiled Make Elections Great Again Act (“MEGA”), introduced by Representative Bryan Steil (R‑Wisc.), recognizes that the legislative branch, not the executive, is the appropriate forum for changing law. That’s great. But the MEGA Act, like President Trump’s executive order and like the For The People Act supported by Democrats in 2021, still violates principles of federalism. Election administration is one of the few remaining areas of American policy that is still largely determined by the states. And that’s a good thing. Feder…
Stephen Richer When President Trump issued his March 25, 2025, executive order on election administration, both Walter Olson and I sympathized with its policy aims, but we wrote that it unlawfully usurped legislative authority and trampled on federalism. The newly unveiled Make Elections Great Again Act (“MEGA”), introduced by Representative Bryan Steil (R‑Wisc.), recognizes that the legislative branch, not the executive, is the appropriate forum for changing law. That’s great. But the MEGA Act, like President Trump’s executive order and like the For The People Act supported by Democrats in 2021, still violates principles of federalism. Election administration is one of the few remaining areas of American policy that is still largely determined by the states. And that’s a good thing. Federalism in election administration allows states to recognize their unique attributes (e.g., western states support mail voting because of the larger geographic distances), it strengthens election security (there isn’t one hack that can disrupt all 50 states), and it encourages democratic entrepreneurship (states can test different ideas and learn from each other). The MEGA Act is 83 pages long and imposes federal control over many facets of election administration. Some rights currently enjoyed by the states that would no longer be permitted include: States could no longer allow universal mail balloting (as is done in many western states, including Utah, California, and Oregon). States could no longer accept mail ballots that are sent on Election Day, but arrive after Election Day (as is allowed in 14 states and Washington, DC). States could no longer use ranked choice voting to determine their federal delegation (as is done in Alaska currently). States could no longer allow voters to give their sealed mail ballot packets to their neighbors for delivery (as is allowed in 18 states) Minimum thresholds are an appropriate place for Congress to act. For example, I support the call for requiring universal documented proof of citizenship. But many of the above items get into the nitty-gritty of election administration. Let’s leave those items to the states. A supersized, MEGA federal government in charge of everything should not be our aspiration.