Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Oklahoma reformers seek multi-partisan redistricting commission

Oklahoma Capitol

Currently, the Republican-controlled Oklahoma Legislature oversees the state's redistricting process every 10 years.

Wikimedia Commons

A redistricting reform group is petitioning for Oklahoma's legislative and congressional maps to be drawn by a multi-partisan commission.

Through the petition, filed Monday, People Not Politicians aims to take the partisanship out of Oklahoma's mapmaking process. Currently, districts are drawn by the Republican-controlled Legislature and approved by the governor, who is also a Republican.

People Not Politicians is a bipartisan coalition of redistricting reformers, headed by the League of Women Voters of Oklahoma and Let's Fix This. The group will have 90 days to collect almost 178,000 signatures to have this redistricting commission measure placed before voters on the ballot in 2020.


If successful, the nine-person commission would consist of non-elected members from multiple political parties. Six of the members would be chosen by a panel of retired state judges, led by the chief justice of the Oklahoma Supreme Court. These six would then select the remaining members. Three of the commissioners would be Democrats, three Republicans and three would be unaffiliated with either major party.

Oklahoma joins a growing number of states seeking nonpartisan control of redistricting ahead of the 2020 Census. Last year, five states — Colorado, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio and Utah — passed legislation to reform their mapmaking process.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Read More

A better direction for democracy reform

Denver election judge Eric Cobb carefully looks over ballots as counting continued on Nov. 6. Voters in Colorado rejected a ranked choice voting and open primaries measure.

Helen H. Richardson/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images

A better direction for democracy reform

Drutman is a senior fellow at New America and author "Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America."

This is the conclusion of a two-part, post-election series addressing the questions of what happened, why, what does it mean and what did we learn? Read part one.

I think there is a better direction for reform than the ranked choice voting and open primary proposals that were defeated on Election Day: combining fusion voting for single-winner elections with party-list proportional representation for multi-winner elections. This straightforward solution addresses the core problems voters care about: lack of choices, gerrymandering, lack of competition, etc., with a single transformative sweep.

Keep ReadingShow less
To-party doom loop
Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America

Let’s make sense of the election results

Drutman is a senior fellow at New America and author of "Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America."

Well, here are some of my takeaways from Election Day, and some other thoughts.

1. The two-party doom loop keeps getting doomier and loopier.

Keep ReadingShow less
Person voting in Denver

A proposal to institute ranked choice voting in Colorado was rejected by voters.

RJ Sangosti/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images

Despite setbacks, ranked choice voting will continue to grow

Mantell is director of communications for FairVote.

More than 3 million people across the nation voted for better elections through ranked choice voting on Election Day, as of current returns. Ranked choice voting is poised to win majority support in all five cities where it was on the ballot, most notably with an overwhelming win in Washington, D.C. – 73 percent to 27 percent.

Keep ReadingShow less
Electoral College map

It's possible Donald Trump and Kamala Harris could each get 269 electoral votes this year.

Electoral College rules are a problem. A worst-case tie may be ahead.

Johnson is the executive director of the Election Reformers Network, a national nonpartisan organization advancing common-sense reforms to protect elections from polarization. Keyssar is a Matthew W. Stirling Jr. professor of history and social policy at the Harvard Kennedy School. His work focuses on voting rights, electoral and political institutions, and the evolution of democracies.

It’s the worst-case presidential election scenario — a 269–269 tie in the Electoral College. In our hyper-competitive political era, such a scenario, though still unlikely, is becoming increasingly plausible, and we need to grapple with its implications.

Recent swing-state polling suggests a slight advantage for Kamala Harris in the Rust Belt, while Donald Trump leads in the Sun Belt. If the final results mirror these trends, Harris wins with 270 electoral votes. But should Trump take the single elector from Nebraska’s 2nd congressional district — won by Joe Biden in 2020 and Trump in 2016 — then both candidates would be deadlocked at 269.

Keep ReadingShow less