Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

It’s not a democracy when the parties control our elections

Person walking past a "Vote Here" sign

The major political parties have blocked the right of many Americans to vote in primaries, accordign to Rice.

Megan Varner/Washington Post/Getty Images

Rice is the proposer of Initiative 83, a combination of election reforms to open the primaries to independents and implement ranked-choice in Washington, D.C. She is a national spokesperson for Open Primaries and a member of the board of directors of Unite America.

Coming out of the 1960s civil rights era, most teens registering to vote joined their parents’ political party. I did exactly that, joining the Democratic Party. I didn’t know I had the choice to be an independent voter.

Times change.

I split from the Democratic Party and declared my independence years ago. Its propensity to put party over people hasn’t created a space for those of us who don’t perfectly align with their agenda. The local party, along with the national brand, has lost the trust of many because of this rigidity. Big tent? I don’t see it.


I had been deeply disturbed by the erosion of the fundamentals of democracy for a while. Through my lens, as a Black woman, the racism and misogyny unleashed during the Trump administration was a personal assault. From the immediate dissolution of the pandemic response team to governmental attacks on historically Black and women’s institutions, to the encouragement of the terrorist attacks in Charlottesville, things quickly became more horrific.

Since 1865, a consistent theme in building our democracy — growing ever more urgent — has been securing the right to vote for every American. As a child, I accompanied my parents to the voting center every Election Day. This tradition was not uncommon among Black working- and middle-class families. Kids like me were thrilled to observe the ritual — watching my parents fulfill their sacred duty to vote was an event!

In places throughout America today, though, the two major political parties have made a concerted effort to block a right every registered voter should have: to participate in primary elections.

In a dozen states and the District of Columbia, registered voters who don’t belong to a political party are denied the right to vote in any primary elections. Most states limit participation in at least some primaries. This is not what civil rights leaders fought and died for in achieving passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Those trailblazers marched, bled and died for my right to vote.

Here, today, in 2024, I want that right. I demand my constitutional right to vote without joining a political party. It’s past time.

In Washington, D.C., one in six voters are registered as independents. I am one of them. We are prohibited from voting in our city’s taxpayer-funded primary elections. Our votes are suppressed. In a super-majority, Democratic town, the inability for independents to vote in the primary shuts us out of the election that determines who holds the majority of elected offices. The general election here, for all but two races, simply seals results determined in the primary — without the participation of independents.

Many local elected leaders express support for statehood, pleading that statehood is a voter suppression issue. In a city that has already granted the right for non-citizens to vote in local elections, barring independents like me from voting in the primaries is a slap in the face. Why don’t these same politicians defend my right to vote in our primaries with just as much vigor?

I’ve been told, “you have a choice, register as a Democrat.” That’s not a choice, that’s a directive. And it’s not very democratic; in fact, it feels downright autocratic.

We are long past the days when the party — any party — should be able to rule who can participate at the polls. In the long run, what political party can be successful that refuses to build bridges with the largest group of voters in America? After all, 43 percent of voters across the country identify as independent. That constitutes a larger proportion of voters than either of the major parties. Let that settle in.

How would Democrats feel if the state told them they must register as Republicans to cast their ballots? My right to vote is guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States. How can the D.C. Democratic state party override the U.S. Constitution? Primaries are public elections, run by our government and paid for by us, the taxpayers.

The first bold step to move toward a government that chooses people over politics, country over party, is to liberate independent voters and let us vote. Let’s end voter suppression here in D.C. by opening the primaries to independent voters. We deserve the right to exercise the franchise.

It’s 2024. Let us vote.

This article was first published in The Hill on Feb. 24.


Read More

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
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
Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

A voter registration drive in Corpus Christi, Texas, on Oct. 5, 2024. The deadline to register to vote for Texas' March 3 primary election is Feb. 2, 2026. Changes to USPS policies may affect whether a voter registration application is processed on time if it's not postmarked by the deadline.

Gabriel Cárdenas for Votebeat

Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

Texans seeking to register to vote or cast a ballot by mail may not want to wait until the last minute, thanks to new guidance from the U.S. Postal Service.

The USPS last month advised that it may not postmark a piece of mail on the same day that it takes possession of it. Postmarks are applied once mail reaches a processing facility, it said, which may not be the same day it’s dropped in a mailbox, for example.

Keep ReadingShow less
Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less