Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Eight democracy reform lessons from the BadAss Grandmas

Opinion

Eight democracy reform lessons from the BadAss Grandmas

The BadAss Grandmas "practiced politics, home-style," according to Ellen-Earle Chaffee.

Ellen-Earle Chaffee

Chaffee is a founder of North Dakotans for Public Integrity, which works to promote integrity and accountability in government, and of the BadAss Grandmas, who encourage boomer women to engage with the democracy movement. She is a university governance consultant.

Voters shocked the entrenched North Dakota political system last November by approving a new article in the state constitution with three strong anti-corruption policies. Article XIV reveals who is spending money to influence voters, prohibits gifts and other undue influence on public officials and establishes an ethics commission.

The Republican Party, with support from an estimated 76 percent of adults, has held a super-majority in the Legislature and all statewide elected offices for years. The powerful state chamber of commerce never thought Measure 1 would pass.

Big business led a fierce, often dishonest opposition campaign. A mainstream faith denomination vigorously opposed the measure. It seemed obvious that the people who elected those officials, and received this apparently credible messaging, would side with the status quo.

The proponents, newly formed North Dakotans for Public Integrity, started with four retired friends discussing over coffee the increasing corruption associated with our state's oil boom. Adding a few key people for expertise and diversity, we met every Tuesday morning for more than a year, wrote the ballot initiative, partnered with four national democracy organizations — and got a world-class education in political activism. We had only skeleton staff because most in-state major donors are with the super-majority and others felt hopeless. The opposing coalition funded its campaign in six weeks with just 19 checks, outspending us by 20 percent.

Yet we won with 53.6 percent of the vote. What does this say about democracy reform? Here are eight takeaways.


Democracy matters. Think of democracy as a game with rules, goals, coaches, referees, players and fans. The game is complicated, involving redistricting, voting rights, election systems, campaign finance, lobbying, conflict of interest, transparency, accountability, enforcement, government ethics and more. Over time, winning players — wealthy special interests — have revised the rules and befriended the officials to their own advantage. They are gaining ever more power and leaving the rest of us further and further behind. It's time for the scrappy underdogs to stake a claim.

The time is right. Regardless of party, voters are demanding honest government. Clearly, thousands of majority-party members in North Dakota voted their values against the wishes of their party. It is the worst and best of times. At the very moment when democracy is threatened as never before, support for democracy is at historic heights. You've been wanting to do something? Go!

Democracy has many more votes than voices. Democracy reforms are common-sensical. "Of course, we should have an ethics commission — don't we already?" "I had no idea legislators get to draw their own districts!" When people who hate corruption understand that democracy is threatened, they choose democracy over party. Don't be discouraged. You are not alone.

Retirees are a rich source of time, talent and treasure for reform. Nearly all the leading players and many of the volunteers in this story are 65-80 years old. Some of us fought for peace and racial justice in the 1960s or the Equal Rights Amendment in the '70s. Today, we don't see the democracy that we were reared to believe in. We feel betrayed. We aim to leave a meaningful legacy for future generations.

Make it safe for people to vote their values. One-party domination can create fear of financial or social retaliation for those who happen to disagree with that party on a given issue. Encouraging those who favor change to network privately with their friends can help them realize they are not alone and embolden those who are considering voting "wrong."

Take the high road. Be authentic. Nonpartisan political work is not "politics." It brings people together for the common good, and there's no need to be nasty about it. Although our group could have outed many unethical politicians, our emphasis instead was common-sense accountability. Inspired and christened by a teen grandchild, three of us campaigned as BadAss Grandmas, roaming the state in search of the best homemade caramel rolls and sausages. What a refreshing change for us as well as voters. We practiced politics, home-style.

Give the people what they want. Best practice might have been to travel, engage and listen to people throughout the state long before campaign season, but we had neither time nor resources. Instead, we wrote a 19-page first draft of our ballot measure with at least a dozen reforms. A poll found high support for many of them, so we chose the top three, rewrote and ran with it. However you may get there, and however it may or may not square with your own priorities, giving the people what they want is a darn good starting point for success.

You can do this. Help is available. No experience? No problem. If we had known in advance what it would take, we may never have started. There's no question we were phenomenally fortunate to get the help we needed. But if it hadn't worked out this way, we'd have kept trying. Philanthropic and organizational support for democracy reform is the highest it has ever been.

We are all tired of hostility and fear. We want to work for something. More than 80 percent of Americans are for pro-democracy policies. We want to work together for better times. You'll make surprising new friends, feel renewed commitment when disappointed, and wildly celebrate even the smallest gain.

Make it fun. Serious fun.

Find a friend. Join a group. Make a donation. Raise your hand. Get in the game.


Read More

A person signing a piece of paper with other people around them.

Javon Jackson, center, was able to register to vote following passage of a 2019 Nevada law that restored voting rights to formerly incarcerated individuals.

The Nation Is Missing Millions of Voters Due to Lack of Rights for Former Felons

If you gathered every American with a prison record into one contiguous territory and admitted it to the union, you would create the 12th-largest state. It would be home to at least 7 million to 8 million people and hold a dozen votes in the Electoral College.

In a close presidential race, this hypothetical state of the formerly incarcerated could decide who wins the White House.

Keep ReadingShow less
People standing at voting booths.

The proposed SAVE Act and MEGA Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, risking the disenfranchisement of millions of eligible Americans.

Getty Images, EvgeniyShkolenko

The SAVE Act is a Solution in Search of A Problem

The federal government seems to be barreling toward a federal election power grab. Trump's State of the Union address called for the Senate to push through the SAVE Act, which has already passed the House, in the name of so-called "election integrity." And the SAVE Act isn’t the only such bill. Like the SAVE Act, the Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act—introduced in the House—would require voters to provide a document outlined in the Act that allegedly proves their U.S. citizenship. We’ve been down this road before in Texas, and spoiler alert: it was unworkable.

Both the SAVE and MEGA Acts would disenfranchise millions of eligible U.S. citizens without making our federal elections more secure. They seek to roll out a faulty federal voter registration system, despite the existing separate registration and voting process for state and local elections. And these Acts target a minuscule “problem”—but would unleash mass voter purges and confusion.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stickers with the words "I Voted Today."

Virginia is on its way to be the 19th jurisdiction to adopt the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, bringing the U.S. closer to electing presidents by the national popular vote.

Getty Images, EyeWolf

Virginia On The Path to Join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

NPVIC is an agreement among U.S. states and the District of Columbia to award all their electoral votes to the presidential ticket that wins the overall popular vote in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. It is considered a pragmatic, voluntary state-based initiative because it aims to ensure the winner of the national popular vote wins the presidency without requiring a constitutional amendment, operating instead within the existing Electoral College framework by utilizing states' constitutional authority to appoint electors. If enough states join the NPVIC to reach a total of 270 electoral votes, the United States will effectively shift from a winner-take-all (WTA) regime to a national popular vote system for electing the President.

With Virginia's adoption, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact will be adopted by eighteen states and the District of Columbia, collectively holding 222 electoral votes. The compact requires 270 electoral votes (a majority of the 538 total) to take effect. It currently needs forty-eight more electoral votes to become active.

Keep ReadingShow less
With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

Should the U.S. nationalize elections? A constitutional analysis of federalism, the Elections Clause, and the risks of centralized control over voting systems.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Why Nationalizing Elections Threatens America’s Federalist Design

The Federalism Question: Why Nationalizing Elections Deserves Skepticism

The renewed push to nationalize American elections, presented as a necessary reform to ensure uniformity and fairness, deserves the same skepticism our founders directed toward concentrated federal power. The proposal, though well-intentioned, misunderstands both the constitutional architecture of our republic and the practical wisdom in decentralized governance.

The Constitutional Framework Matters

The Constitution grants states explicit authority over the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections, with Congress retaining only the power to "make or alter such Regulations." This was not an oversight by the framers; it was intentional design. The Tenth Amendment reinforces this principle: powers not delegated to the federal government remain with the states and the people. Advocates for nationalization often cite the Elections Clause as justification, but constitutional permission is not constitutional wisdom.

Keep ReadingShow less