Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Young voters are more independent

Opinion

Florida primary

Jessie Finlayson, a volunteer election worker, assembles voting booths at the Robert L. Gilder Elections Service Center in Tampa for Florida's closed primaries.

Octavio Jones/Getty Images

Rodriguez, who will be a first-year student at the University of Chicago in the fall, is the co-founder of Students for Open Primaries and starred in the documentary “The Young Vote.”

Two years ago, I wrote an op-ed about my pre-registration to vote in Florida as an NPA, shorthand for “no party affiliate”. In June, I turned 18 and officially became a registered voter. My party? Still no party. I am one of 3.8 million NPAs in the Sunshine State. I am not satisfied with the two-party dilemma, which has continued to impact our nation negatively on everything from the economy to the environment. And I am not alone, as 50 percent of millennials and Generation Z voters today are independent.

Unfortunately, closed primaries are not just an issue in Florida. In 14 other states and the District of Columbia, at least one party will conduct closed primaries for congressional and state-level offices in the current election cycle. This means that for the 30 percent of uncontested general elections in 2022, independents and third-party voters lose out on making their voice heard on important issues that are decided coming out of the primary.


Gen Zers and young voters have the most to lose in the upcoming midterm elections. We all saw the consequences of bad policy. Nationwide, we are now seeing the impacts that Congress’ failure to codify Roe v. Wade had on reproductive rights following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the landmark decision. Our politicians aren’t acting on the issues that matter to all voters, instead choosing to only act on what favors their own party. In Florida, legislators are focused on waging wars in the classroom and “ setting aflame ” the mouse at Disney World because it satisfies party-line voters in the primary. The current system doesn’t work, and while our generation has the most to lose, many are still locked out of the primaries.

There is a huge dysfunction between who voters are versus whom they elect. Young voters have diverse political opinions, but the people being voted into office have little to no diversity in their political actions. As the future of the nation, young Americans will feel tomorrow’s impacts of the decisions that our elected officials are being trusted to make today. Open primaries will produce elected officials more accountable to their constituents than to their party while closed primaries will result in officials who are slow or unwilling to act on pressing matters impacting the future of the nation. Open primaries let independent voters who were previously shut out of the system vote; such a system also allows Democrats and Republicans to vote for whomever is the best candidate and not the person who has the more extreme voting record on either side of the aisle.

Despite the huge implications closed primaries have on elections, there is a concerning little amount of data on the very real impacts that closed primaries have on young voter turnout. The latest numbers directly related to young independents come from a 2018 report from Tufts University, which found that 44 percent of young voters identify as third party or independent.

That is why my organization, Students for Open Primaries, is moving forward with the 2022 Young Voter Survey. From now until the end of the summer season, we are reaching out to young voters from across the country to hear about their experiences with election-related issues, including closed primaries. Voters ages 16-39 can answer this short, 10-question survey at youngvotersurvey.com.

Please take this important referendum on election reform for young voters.


Read More

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Crowd of people walking on a street.

Andy Andrews//Getty Images

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Biologist and author Paul Ehrlich, the most influential Chicken Little of the last century, died at the age of 93 this week. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” launched decades of institutional panic in government, entertainment and journalism.

Ehrlich’s core neo-Malthusian argument was that overpopulation would exhaust the supply of food and natural resources, leading to a cascade of catastrophes around the world. “The Population Bomb” opens with a bold prediction, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

People clear rubble in a house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026 in Tehran, Iran. The United States and Israel continued their joint attack on Iran that began on February 28. Iran retaliated by firing waves of missiles and drones at Israel, and targeting U.S. allies in the region.

Getty Images, Majid Saeedi

Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

Most of what we have heard from the administration as it pertains to the Iran War is swagger and bro-talk. A few days into the war, the White House released a social media video that combined footage of the bombardment with clips from video games. Not long after, it released a second video, titled “Justice the American Way,” that mixed images of the U.S. military with scenes from movies like Gladiator and Top Gun Maverick.

Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, War Secretary Pete Hegseth boasted of “death and destruction from the sky all day long.” “They are toast, and they know it,” he said. “This was never meant to be a fair fight... we are punching them while they’re down.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A student in uniform walking through a campus.

A Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadet walks through campus November 7, 2003 in Princeton, New Jersey.

Getty Images, Spencer Platt

Hegseth is Dumbing Down the Military (on Purpose)

One day before the United States began an ill-defined and illegal war of indefinite length with Iran, Pete Hegseth angrily attacked a different enemy: the Ivy League. The Secretary of War denounced Ivy League universities as "woke breeding grounds of toxic indoctrination” and then eliminated long-standing college fellowship programs with more than a dozen elite colleges, which had historically served as a pipeline for service members to the upper ranks of military leadership. Of the schools now on Hegseth’s "no-fly list," four sit in the top ten of the World’s Top Universities for 2026. So, why does the Secretary of War not want his armed forces to have the best education available? Because he wants a military without a brain.

For a guy obsessed with being the strongest and most lethal force in the world, cutting access to world-class schools is a bizarre gambit. It does reveal Hegseth doesn’t consider intelligence a factor–let alone an asset–in strength or lethality. That tracks. Hegseth alleges the Ivies infect officers with “globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks…” God forbid the tip of the sword of our foreign policy has knowledge of international cooperation and global interconnectedness. The Ivy League has its own issues, but the Pentagon’s claim that they "fail to deliver rigorous education grounded in realism” is almost laughable. I’m a veteran Lieutenant Commander with two Ivy League degrees, both paid for with military tuition assistance, and I promise: it was rigorous. Meanwhile, are Hegseth’s performative politics grounded in reality? Attacking Harvard on social media the eve of initiating a new war with a foreign adversary is disgraceful, and even delusional.

Keep ReadingShow less
Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?
Person working at a desk with a laptop and books.

Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?

Draft an important email without using AI. Write it from scratch — no suggestions, no autocomplete, and no prompt to ChatGPT to compose or revise the email.

Now ask yourself: Did it feel slower? Harder? Slightly uncomfortable?

Keep ReadingShow less