Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

A new case for electoral reform

A new case for electoral reform
Getty Images

Reinhold Ernst is a volunteer and state leader of Veterans For All Voters, recently renamed from Veterans for Political Innovation. This team exists to support pro-democracy reforms around the country.

Advocating for electoral reforms can be frustrating - some people just don't "get it," no matter how many hours you spend going through all the different benefits you seek to impress. It can feel almost as if they turn a blind eye and refuse to see how electoral systems are foundational to whether or not our nation can solve the problems it faces, or not. Tougher-than-expected conversations force advocates of anything, and certainly advocates of bold electoral reforms, to ponder how it might be possible to convince the seemingly inconvincible. Indeed, the time has come to clarify the whole case - not just a series of individual arguments - around electoral reforms like open primaries, ranked choice voting, redistricting, finance reform, term limits, and more.


It is not much of a secret that focusing on "why" is a great place to start - there's even a famous book or two about it. The good news is that electoral reforms have dozens of reasons for why they are great ideas and better than the status quo. But this reality is a double-edged sword. The bad news is that a firehose of reasons can be confusing, with the default approach being to run through dozens of polls and statistics to speak to one angle after another in hopes of eventually saying the right thing. That is rarely a recipe for success. A salesperson will never sell their goods or services on arguments about being cheaper or neater than the competitor, if the prospective customer doesn't see their problem in the first place. Selling the whole case for electoral reform is no different - arguments about "this solution is better than that one" aren't as compelling as "X Y Z problems are making your life worse." What is needed is a framework to guide conversations towards building consensus about what problems we face - nevermind the reforms and the nuance of how they work. Is there a single, compelling narrative to tie it all together?

Framework for Clarifying "the Why": What makes a country great?

1) Find a skeptic, and have an open, honest conversation about what makes a country (any country) great. Regardless of how you may feel about the former president's campaign slogan, it does force us to pause and ask these fundamental questions. What makes America the great and exceptional nation Reagan and Kennedy both saw? Is it GDP and how much we consume? No, that's not it. Is it having the strongest military? No, not that either, or else military dictatorships would be desirable. Get them thinking and talking. Their responses may surprise you and can be exactly the hints you need for knowing which reasons for change will be the most salient. Their responses will help distill the list of 100 reasons for reform down to the critical few that might change their mind - a tailored argument instead of a firehose.

2) Propose your own answer for what makes a country (any country) great. There's no perfect answer, but if you're looking for an answer of your own, then pick up a copy of the book Societal Foundations of National Competitiveness. The title is a mouthful, but simply put, it's about what qualities make a nation able to do great things and sustain a dynamic society. The research was funded by the U.S. military to better understand the "home front" and its impact on the nation's ability to remain the example that other nations should emulate. Their research highlights seven foundational ingredients for enduring excellence, with an honest assessment of where America is today....things aren't looking great.

  • National will: This is the belief that your country has the imagination to conceive great ambitions and the heart to make them reality. Today, three of four Americans believe the nation is unable to tackle the problems we face, and even futile to imagine, so why bother? More concerning, there is a generational divide with disbelief and disenchantment increasing as you look down the generations to today's youth. Only 18% of America's youth think our nation is able to do big, beautiful things with most faulting democracy as the prime reason for why we cannot.
    • Inflection Point: How do we reignite patriotism and belief that democracy can deliver?
  • Unified National Identity: This is the common thread that ties us all together. Today, partisan identities of Democrat or Republican are taking precedence over common identity, with both sides actively avoiding and despising the other. The decades-long trend is negative, so no one or two election cycles are at blame. Citizens distrust each other at levels not seen since the Civil War, and especially along party-lines.
    • Inflection Point: Party over country is increasingly real. How do we get back to "country first"?
  • Shared Opportunity: This is the ability to make one's life better and to help neighbors with the same - the American dream. Today, opportunity and equality are worsening across several socio-economic lines (race, wealth status, etc). Some trends are positive, but several decades-long trends are negative as certain parts of our society have been overlooked in too many ways, for too long. This is the blue-collar working class, and minority populations alike.
    • Inflection Point: How do we give those struggling to see “the American dream” greater voice into reforms that can help them?
  • An Active State: This is the age-old debate about big governance versus small - but where the purpose of government is clear, the state actually steps up to tackle problems. One example is about national-level infrastructure. The government has long recognized its role in establishing objectives and marshaling resources to meet them, for the benefit of all. No private institution should ever be expected or empowered to do the same since the point of infrastructure is about the greater good, not profits. Today, according to Pew, the top problems Americans worry about today are 1) inflation and overspending, 2) access and cost of health-care, 3) political gridlock, 4) drug and gun crimes.
    • Inflection Point: How likely do you think our nation is able to pass meaningful laws on America’s most-pressing issues? Why or why not?
  • Effective Institutions: This is the ability of government organizations to carry out their prescribed missions. Today, the U.S. is relatively high in world standing, but there are two huge caveats. First, the U.S. has seen a slight decline in effectiveness every year for 15 years now - not a good trend. The second exception is the three branches of government, and growing inability to execute basic functions. Congress is increasingly unable to perform its ability to execute basic functions like pass a budget (let alone a balanced one), hold the Executive branch accountable, or even elect its own leadership. This has led to off-loading authority to the president, bringing us slowly to the 'Era of the Imperial Presidency'. Meanwhile, trust in the Supreme Court has never been lower, at 28%.
    • Inflection Point: Why are our three basic institutions breaking down?
  • A Learning Society: This is partly about educational outcomes, but more about our ability to adapt to a changing world as new technologies are devised, geopolitical orders evolve, and more. Today, America's educational outcomes are nothing to be ashamed of or brag about. The real issue is what we learn and how we perceive the world. The immense and increasing flow of misinformation is able to create and leverage echo chambers, to put us into a doom-loop of distrust and dysfunction, leaving our nation increasingly incapable of adapting to the emergent problems our society faces. The relationship between the government and media is driving this country insane. What our society is learning is that both sides cast the other side as the enemy and at fault for all that is wrong - hardly the right lessons.
    • Inflection Point: Why are politicians incentivized to inflame passions by needing to take polarizing positions in order to win, instead of wanting to constructively engage those with opposing views?
  • Competitive Diversity & Pluralism: This is about the "establishment," and the ability or not for new groups of individuals to organize, build compelling platforms, and challenge the status quo in order to "do something about it" on the problems above. Today, data reveals the U.S. has little political diversity and pluralism, as electoral structures are effectively shutting out any new entrant to the duopoly, or any incentive for working across the aisle.
  • Inflection Point: The "establishment" is real, made possible by the processes that enable them to get them into office and stay there. How do we get a new system where every politician, in every election, can have real competition?

3) Nail down root causes. If all the above are experiencing unpleasant symptoms, ask them what are possible root problems that must be tackled if we are ever to make America great once again. Let them go beyond problems within our electoral system, as those are important too. But then bring focus to electoral processes as presenting several root causes - about finance, districting, primaries, the duopoly, and more. Spend as much time here as you need, otherwise you will have failed to establish "the why" and any discussion on reforms will be just as ineffective as before. The key is to know your audience and which of the seven foundations to emphasize. While conservative and liberal mindsets may generally agree these seven foundations are important, their prioritization will probably look different.

  • Through the conservative lens: Patriotism, dismantling the establishment, affecting the media, and revitalizing the middle class are some angles that may resonate greatly with conservative audiences. Lean into them, and make the connection to electoral reform.
  • Through the liberal lens: Shared opportunity, effective governance, and competitive diversity are angles that may resonate greatly with liberal audiences. Lean into them, and make the connection to electoral reform.

4) Bring it all together. Ask them what possible solutions exist to revitalize any and all of the above. Introduce the possibility of open primaries, ranked choice voting, ballot access and anything else you are passionate about as strategic-level ideas that can positively impact all of seven of these foundations. If they still resist these reforms, ask them point blank if they have any better ideas. Maybe you'll learn something, but you'll probably get deflective answers. The point is the status quo cannot sustain. It will be tempting to discuss how these reforms will work in a technical sense, but that is still less important than hammering why they're necessary - we can negotiate the details of how later.

We don't want to promise the framework above as a panacea that will convince every skeptic of all electoral reforms. However, we do hope it can bring some new structure for framing “the why” for those who simply are the most resistant to change. We at Veterans For All Voters wish you a wonderful holiday season, for however you choose to celebrate your traditions. And as you gather with family and friends, we challenge you to find one skeptic and engage them. Our nation will change, one conversation at a time. Good luck, and see you in 2024.


Read More

The Future of DEI in Higher Education: Unpacking Recent Federal Restrictions
A group of people standing in a circle with their hands together

The Future of DEI in Higher Education: Unpacking Recent Federal Restrictions

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

  • Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs serve diverse student populations at colleges and universities across the nation. DEI programs in higher education have traditionally supported first-generation college students, students with disabilities, veterans, low-income students, and racial and ethnic minorities through offices, scholarships, cultural centers, and accessibility services.
  • Federal initiatives, such as TRIO or the Full-Service Community Schools program, are facing cuts to funding due to DEI-related federal policy, affecting students across the nation.

Defining DEI

From debates surrounding race-conscious admission policies to questions about the role and funding of identity-based student centers, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) has become a widely debated topic in higher education policy. DEI refers to institutional policies and programs–such as mentorship opportunities, cultural centers, and support programs–which improve campus climate and student access for underrepresented groups. Though many colleges and universities across the United States have developed DEI initiatives aimed at shaping student access and institutional priorities, recent legal and policy developments have raised questions about how these efforts align with federal law.

Keep ReadingShow less
Rear view of teenage boy walking with arm around friends

Why many young men feel politically and socially adrift, how changing gender roles affect masculinity, self-esteem, relationships, and the future of society.

Maskot / Getty Images

Lost Boys - What Is the Role of a Man in Today's Society?

A recent New York Times article stated that young males who provided an important swing vote for Trump in 2024 are discouraged by what Trump has done and not done while in office. But they are nevertheless not particularly inclined to vote Democratic because they don't see the Party as welcoming their view of masculinity and they don't know where they fit in this society.

These young men assume that because the Party supports equality for women in the workplace and because many young women no longer have marriage and having children at the top of their agenda, the Party would not be a welcoming home for them. They see themselves as striving for the masculinity of their fathers' or grandfathers' day, where the man was the breadwinner in the family and had respect and authority. Not the weaker half in relationships with women.

Keep ReadingShow less
Showing Up and Staying: Disaster Relief in an Age of Distrust

NECHAMA volunteers in Western North Carolina after Hurricane Helene.

Showing Up and Staying: Disaster Relief in an Age of Distrust

As the Atlantic hurricane season officially began on June 1, disaster response organizations across the country are preparing for the next storm. That preparation includes coordinating logistics, purchasing supplies, training volunteers, and strengthening partnerships. It now also requires planning for an environment shaped by misinformation, distrust, and competing narratives.

A recent 60 Minutes segment examining extremist groups in disaster zones highlighted how quickly public perceptions can form after a disaster. Recovery efforts are now followed by outside groups and online networks attempting to influence how events are understood while communities are still in crisis.

Keep ReadingShow less
How State Courts Can Help Deflect the Supreme Court’s Latest Blow to Multiracial Democracy

Black and white illustration of voters

State Court Report

How State Courts Can Help Deflect the Supreme Court’s Latest Blow to Multiracial Democracy

With its April ruling in Louisiana v. Callais, the Supreme Court delivered yet another blow to the Voting Rights Act, specifically Section 2, which governs race in redistricting. The decision was sad and utterly predictable, but still nothing short of astonishing. Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the Court’s conservative supermajority, stealthily setting aside 40 years of legal precedent under Section 2 largely on the belief that racism is a thing of the past and extreme partisan gerrymandering is, in effect, a fundamental right of state lawmakers. Callais had a tortured path to the Court, a feature of the case that has undoubtedly been eclipsed by the lawless nature of the ruling itself, all of which reveals that the Supreme Court represents the gravest threat to multiracial democracy in the United States. (I argued as much in a law review article, predicting the outcome and analyzing the ways a Court gone rogue might get to that ruling.)

What’s more? In recent years, the Court has played fast and loose with a “principle” purportedly meant to limit chaos around elections, known as Purcell. But instead of limiting chaos, the Court’s Purcell jurisprudence will hasten and aggrandize the already-problematic impact of the Callais ruling. As the nation’s redistricting wars inevitably continue — in this election season, the 2028 presidential campaign, and even the next decade — state courts can help stave off democratic erosion by resisting the urge to invoke Purcell.

Keep ReadingShow less