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

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