Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Don’t confuse the symptom with the problem

Trump and Biden at the debate

Political parties should not get to decide whether primaries, or even debates, are held, writes Perls.

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Perls is founder and president of NM Open Elections and a former state representative in New Mexico.

It’s time to talk about how President Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the presidential campaign is related to our broken political system. This failing system got us to the point where we had the two major party candidates rejected by 70 percent of the electorate, according to most polls.

Biden and former President Donald Trump are not the problem — they are a symptom of a much deeper problem that has led to a deeply dysfunctional political system full of destructive polarization and hyper-partisanship.


You can be a Biden supporter and believe he should have stuck with what many thought was his promise to be a one-term president. He should never have considered running for a second term, but there was a whole political industry of elitist insiders surrounding him – from political appointees and lobbyists to consultants and major funders — who had too much to lose if he stepped down.

Let’s review what happened during the primary season controlled by the so-called elites, the political parties and Biden’s campaign team (as well as Trump’s): nothing. And let’s be clear, the Republican Party is just as broken as the Democrat Party.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

There were no meaningful primaries and debates. Many primaries were canceled by the parties. Neither Biden nor Trump agreed to debate other credible candidates, so we had no idea how fit either one was to carry on a rational, thoughtful policy conversation. And most Americans came away from the Biden-Trump debate with the impression that neither candidate was well qualified to lead our country for the next four years.

What if the political parties did not control primary elections in the United States? What if both Biden and Trump actually had to run a primary campaign, debate opponents and face the voters early? Primaries are public elections and should not be subject to cancellation by a private club (which is what political parties are).

This party-controlled primary issue is especially problematic because, as Gallup showed in June, for the first time a majority of voters do not identify with either party. When you hear a talking head or a politician say America is divided in half between Republicans and Democrats, a more accurate picture is that half are independent, a quarter are Republicans and a quarter are Democrats. Yet, there are next to zero independent elected officials nationally.

Why do we have more choices of cereal and ice cream than presidential candidates? Why do private clubs control who can vote in the first round of public elections or even if such elections are held? That is not democracy.

This is no way to run a country and the little people are watching, not just the elites. It is time to fundamentally change the way we elect, district and finance candidates running for everything from county commission to the presidency. This is yet another reminder that it is time for the nation to adopt open, nonpartisan primaries and ranked-choice voting, so that all voters have their voices heard all the time.

Read More

MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

A check mark and hands.

Photo by Allison Saeng on Unsplash. Unsplash+ License obtained by the author.

MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

Originally published by Independent Voter News.

Today, I am proud to share an exciting milestone in my journey as an advocate for democracy and electoral reform.

Keep ReadingShow less
Half-Baked Alaska

A photo of multiple checked boxes.

Getty Images / Thanakorn Lappattaranan

Half-Baked Alaska

This past year’s elections saw a number of state ballot initiatives of great national interest, which proposed the adoption of two “unusual” election systems for state and federal offices. Pairing open nonpartisan primaries with a general election using ranked choice voting, these reforms were rejected by the citizens of Colorado, Idaho, and Nevada. The citizens of Alaska, however, who were the first to adopt this dual system in 2020, narrowly confirmed their choice after an attempt to repeal it in November.

Ranked choice voting, used in Alaska’s general elections, allows voters to rank their candidate choices on their ballot and then has multiple rounds of voting until one candidate emerges with a majority of the final vote and is declared the winner. This more representative result is guaranteed because in each round the weakest candidate is dropped, and the votes of that candidate’s supporters automatically transfer to their next highest choice. Alaska thereby became the second state after Maine to use ranked choice voting for its state and federal elections, and both have had great success in their use.

Keep ReadingShow less
Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

The United States Supreme Court.

Getty Images / Rudy Sulgan

Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

Fourteen years ago, after the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the popular blanket primary system, Californians voted to replace the deeply unpopular closed primary that replaced it with a top-two system. Since then, Democratic Party insiders, Republican Party insiders, minor political parties, and many national reform and good government groups, have tried (and failed) to deep-six the system because the public overwhelmingly supports it (over 60% every year it’s polled).

Now, three minor political parties, who opposed the reform from the start and have unsuccessfully sued previously, are once again trying to overturn it. The Peace and Freedom Party, the Green Party, and the Libertarian Party have teamed up to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Their brief repeats the same argument that the courts have previously rejected—that the top-two system discriminates against parties and deprives voters of choice by not guaranteeing every party a place on the November ballot.

Keep ReadingShow less
Ranked Choice Voting May Be a Stepping Stone to Proportional Representation

Someone filling out a ballot.

Getty Images / Hill Street Studios

Ranked Choice Voting May Be a Stepping Stone to Proportional Representation

In the 2024 U.S. election, several states did not pass ballot initiatives to implement Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) despite strong majority support from voters under 65. Still, RCV was defended in Alaska, passed by a landslide in Washington, D.C., and has earned majority support in 31 straight pro-RCV city ballot measures. Still, some critics of RCV argue that it does not enhance and promote democratic principles as much as forms of proportional representation (PR), as commonly used throughout Europe and Latin America.

However, in the U.S. many people have not heard of PR. The question under consideration is whether implementing RCV serves as a stepping stone to PR by building public understanding and support for reforms that move away from winner-take-all systems. Utilizing a nationally representative sample of respondents (N=1000) on the 2022 Cooperative Election Survey (CES), results show that individuals who favor RCV often also know about and back PR. When comparing other types of electoral reforms, RCV uniquely transfers into support for PR, in ways that support for nonpartisan redistricting and the national popular vote do not. These findings can inspire efforts that demonstrate how RCV may facilitate the adoption of PR in the U.S.

Keep ReadingShow less