Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

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

U.S. President Barack Obama speaking on the phone in the Oval Office.

U.S. President Barack Obama talks President Barack Obama talks with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan during a phone call from the Oval Office on November 2, 2009 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, The White House

‘Obama, You're 15 Years Too Late!’

The mid-decade redistricting fight continues, while the word “hypocrisy” has become increasingly common in the media.

The origin of mid-decade redistricting dates back to the early history of the United States. However, its resurgence and legal acceptance primarily stem from the Texas redistricting effort in 2003, a controversial move by the Republican Party to redraw the state's congressional districts, and the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court decision in League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry. This decision, which confirmed that mid-decade redistricting is not prohibited by federal law, was a significant turning point in the acceptance of this practice.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand of a person casting a ballot at a polling station during voting.

Gerrymandering silences communities and distorts elections. Proportional representation offers a proven path to fairer maps and real democracy.

Getty Images, bizoo_n

Gerrymandering Today, Gerrymandering Tomorrow, Gerrymandering Forever

In 1963, Alabama Governor George Wallace declared, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." (Watch the video of his speech.) As a politically aware high school senior, I was shocked by the venom and anger in his voice—the open, defiant embrace of systematic disenfranchisement, so different from the quieter racism I knew growing up outside Boston.

Today, watching politicians openly rig elections, I feel that same disbelief—especially seeing Republican leaders embrace that same systematic approach: gerrymandering now, gerrymandering tomorrow, gerrymandering forever.

Keep ReadingShow less
An oversized ballot box surrounded by people.

Young people worldwide form new parties to reshape politics—yet America’s two-party system blocks them.

Getty Images, J Studios

No Country for Young Politicians—and How To Fix That

In democracies around the world, young people have started new political parties whenever the establishment has sidelined their views or excluded them from policymaking. These parties have sometimes reinvigorated political competition, compelled established parties to take previously neglected issues seriously, or encouraged incumbent leaders to find better ways to include and reach out to young voters.

In Europe, a trio in their twenties started Volt in 2017 as a pan-European response to Brexit, and the party has managed to win seats in the European Parliament and in some national legislatures. In Germany, young people concerned about climate change created Klimaliste, a party committed to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as per the Paris Agreement. Although the party hasn’t won seats at the federal level, they have managed to win some municipal elections. In Chile, leaders of the 2011 student protests, who then won seats as independent candidates, created political parties like Revolución Democrática and Convergencia Social to institutionalize their movements. In 2022, one of these former student leaders, Gabriel Boric, became the president of Chile at 36 years old.

Keep ReadingShow less
How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

Demonstrators gather outside of The United States Supreme Court during an oral arguments in Gill v. Whitford to call for an end to partisan gerrymandering on October 3, 2017 in Washington, DC

Getty Images, Olivier Douliery

How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground. ~ Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Col. Edward Carrington, Paris, 27 May 1788

The Problem We Face

The U.S. House of Representatives was designed as the chamber of Congress most directly tethered to the people. Article I of the Constitution mandates that seats be apportioned among the states according to population and that members face election every two years—design features meant to keep representatives responsive to shifting public sentiment. Unlike the Senate, which prioritizes state sovereignty and representation, the House translates raw population counts into political voice: each House district is to contain roughly the same number of residents, ensuring that every citizen’s vote carries comparable weight. In principle, then, the House serves as the nation’s demographic mirror, channeling the diverse preferences of the electorate into lawmaking and acting as a safeguard against unresponsive or oligarchic governance.

Nationally, the mismatch between the overall popular vote and the partisan split in House seats is small, with less than a 1% tilt. But state-level results tell a different story. Take Connecticut: Democrats hold all five seats despite Republicans winning over 40% of the statewide vote. In Oklahoma, the inverse occurs—Republicans control every seat even though Democrats consistently earn around 40% of the vote.

Keep ReadingShow less