Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The big ticket: Final-five voting is for the youth

The big ticket: Final-five voting is for the youth
Getty Images

Henry Murray is a student at Tufts University from Lawrenceville, New Jersey. He is entering his junior year and studying international relations.

As a college student who, like many of my classmates, is frustrated with politics in America, I’d like to reimagine our congressional elections. Our country’s two major political parties have become increasingly one dimensional and stubborn, the result being a paralysis of democratic processes. The youth of this country, a majority of which are not aligned with either party, present an opportunity for change. However, energizing my generation will not be enough to improve our democratic process. Significant institutional reform must occur to facilitate real progress toward a healthier democracy. Open primaries, ranked choice voting, and instant runoff elections are a few of many reforms that could play a big part motivating the youth by creating a less partisan legislature.


Youth voters are characterized as those ages 18 to 29. As a 20 year old, I fall on the younger end, but through my friends and older siblings, I feel connected to the group as a whole. While many refer to our generations as a monolithic voting block that is purely a boost for the left, in reality, young people of the United States are diverse and complex.

According to the Center For Information & Research On Civic Learning And Engagement, 38 percent of youth voters do not identify with one of the two major political parties. The plurality of people around my age are independent, but they have not yet made their full impact known because, as CIRCLE reports, they have been “neglected by campaigns.” The largest group of young voters who did not vote in the 2022 midterm elections were those not aligned with a major political party.

When I ask my friends about politics, I often receive answers like: “I don’t do politics,” “I don’t like politicians,” or “it doesn’t matter.” I don’t believe these answers indicate young people don’t care about the government or democracy but instead are disengaged from and uninspired by politics because of the extreme hyper-partisanship. The deep divide in our country has made politics so contentious that many young people don’t want to be associated with either side and thus don’t vote. Plus, the negative effects of gerrymandering that result in congressional districts that always vote Democratic or Republican discourage young voters from believing their vote will change anything.

Youth voters feel powerless and unrepresented in today's political world. A well-functioning democracy is dependent on a high rate of political participation. This should be enough reason to encourage more political representation of and outreach to young people in America. Unfortunately, just wanting less polarization will not bring it about. Without an understanding of its root causes and actions leading to change, the voice of the people will continue to be unheard.

Gerrymandering obstructs our ability to hold fair and competitive elections. Many Congressional districts are mapped in a way that predetermines results and renders many votes useless. When a party is all but guaranteed to win in a district, the minority votes and even the excess majority votes essentially don’t matter. The elections are also decided on a plurality, so even if there is significant support for the minority, they can still be left with no representation. For example, in my home state of Massachusetts in the 2012 house elections 30 percent of the vote went to the Republicans, but they didn’t win any seats.

Many organizations have proposed and some state and local governments have tried different election formats to combat the gerrymandering problem. Among them are open primaries, ranked choice voting, term limits, multi member districts, proportional representation, and bigger general election ballots. One option that combines several of these strategies and to me, is particularly applicable to the concerns of the youth, is final-five voting. Democracy Found, an organization started by Katherine Gehl and Austin Ramirez, has developed a voting system “designed to address the electoral incentives that lead to partisan gridlock.” Final-five voting features an open primary that sends the top five candidates into a general election that uses ranked choice voting and instant runoffs to ensure that the winning candidate has a majority.

With final-five voting, independent voters would feel like our vote means something. Candidates would need to appeal to the majority of voters, and with a broader range to choose from, independently minded young people might find someone who they feel represents and relates to them rather than having to vote for the lesser of two evils.

The road to a healthy democracy is a two-way street. My generation must actively learn more about politics and voting and become more involved. At the same time political parties need to be more proactive about reaching out to the younger generations. And lastly voting reform is required to make everyone's vote count.


Read More

Beware the moral panic over AI data centers

A person holds signs during a nationwide protest against AI data center expansion outside Peace Hall in New Port Richey, Florida on July 18, 2026.

(Thomas Simonetti/AFP via Getty Images/TNS)

Beware the moral panic over AI data centers

Don’t look now, but we seem to have a moral panic on our hands.

The term moral panic, at least as a social science concept, is relatively modern. It was coined by Stanley Cohen in the 1972 book “Folk Devils and Moral Panics.” Moral panics emerge when large numbers of people start to freak out about something that doesn’t warrant the freak out.

Keep ReadingShow less
Business owner hanging an open sign at a cafe

Black wealth is rising but the racial wealth gap is widening. From Douglass to Mays to today, the freedom struggle's unfinished business is ownership.

Luis Alvarez/Getty Images

Salute A True America 250: Black History Lessons on Power Everyone Needs Today

From Emmaus, Pennsylvania and Staten Island to Veterans of Foreign Wars posts in Kansas, Tennessee, N. Carolina and more, as well as the Ohio State Fair's butter cow theme (and deviled egg recipes), the celebration of America 250 continues throughout the rest of the sesquicentennial year.

Added to the recent Sail250 tall ship event culminating in Boston’s harbor attended by millions was part of the country’s s 1776 official birthdate of independence, but the persistent calls for Black freedom of the last two centuries are still ignored.

Keep ReadingShow less
Ross Perot

American businessman and politician Ross Perot, Annapolis, Maryland, 1992.

(Photo by Arnold Sachs/Consolidated News Pictures/Getty Images)

Perot 2.0

On February 20, 1992, Texas businessman Ross Perot appeared on Larry King Live and set in motion a significant challenge to the two-party status quo. I’m not asking to be drafted. But if the people want to register me in all 50 states, I’ll promise you this: between now and the conventions we’ll get both parties’ heads straight.

Hundreds of thousands of Americans responded. Volunteers put him on the ballot. By June he was leading in the polls. Even after dropping out of the race for a month (someone should write a book about why he did that), he received 20,000,000 votes.

Keep ReadingShow less
United States' Constitution and Declaration of Independence on a flag background

The Constitution didn't create American prosperity — geography, immigration, and historical luck did. Here's why that matters for reform debates.

miflippo/Getty Images

The Constitution Did Not Make America Rich

Americans are taught a reassuring story about their country’s success. The United States became prosperous, powerful, and free because the framers wrote an exceptional Constitution. The miracle of Philadelphia produced the miracle of America.

The story appears in classrooms, campaign speeches, judicial opinions, and serious scholarly works. Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, and James Robinson have argued that institutions securing property and constraining expropriation help separate rich nations from poor ones. But the popular American version takes that insight and turns it into something much stronger – and misguided: that our prosperity flowed from our particular constitutional design, and that altering it would put the wealth at risk.

Keep ReadingShow less