Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Closed primaries, gerrymandering eliminate competition for House seats

Man sitting in a chair near voting stations

An election official staffs a voting location in Lansing, Mich., during the state's Aug. 6, primary.

Emily Elconin for The Washington Post via Getty Images

Meyers is executive editor of The Fulcrum.

There are 435 voting members of the House of Representatives. But few of those districts — 55, to be exact — will be decided on Election Day, according to new data from the nonprofit organization Unite America. That’s because the vast majority of races were effectively decided during the primaries.

The research data goes deep into what Unite America calls the “Primary Problem,” in which few Americans are determining winners of House elections.


According to UA, 87 percent of House seats are “safe,” meaning they are noncompetitive and considered a lock to be one by the dominant political party. Voters still get to cast ballots in the general elections for those districts, but the candidates, the political operatives and the media already know how things will turn out because partisan gerrymandering has effectively guaranteed the outcomes.

“In November, blue districts will stay blue and red districts will stay red,” UA states in its analysis.

But gerrymandering only tells part of the story. For a variety of reasons, few people participate in primaries. In fact, according to UA, only 7 percent of voting age Americans cast ballots in those 380 safe-seat primaries.

“These numbers speak to the despair many Americans have that their vote does not seem to matter,” said Unite America Executive Director Nick Troiano.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

The research identified three factors leading to such low participation numbers: closed primaries, uncompetitive primaries and lack of interest.

Many states allow only people who are registered with a political party to vote in partisan primaries, even though the elections are state-funded and -operated. This year, 17.6 million people were not permitted to vote in decisive primaries across 15 states that have closed primaries.

Some states allow voters to participate in primaries even if they are not registered with a party. And four states have eliminated separate, partisan primaries in favor of single-ballot primaries in which all candidates run together. Alaska, California, Louisiana and Washington each have a version of an all-candidate primary, with variations on the number of candidates who advance to the general election.

UA found that in those four states, 29 percent of House seats will be decided in November — triple the percentage of races in states with partisan primaries.

Troiano and Unite America identified a “record number” of 2024 ballot initiatives that would create open primaries in more states. Voters in Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada and South Dakota will determine whether to move to open, all-candidate primaries when they cast ballots this fall.

In addition, people in Ohio will vote on whether to establish an independent redistricting commission, which would take mapping out of politicians’ hands. Recent polling indicates the proposal will pass. Currently, nine states use independent redistricting for congressional maps and 10 use them for state legislative redistricting.

“We have an opportunity to usher in a new era of politics where all voters’ voices matter and where our leaders represent a true majority — not just the 7 percent who determine party primaries,” Troiano said.

Among those voters eligible to participate in primaries, many saw ballots with only one candidate running for the dominant party’s nomination (169 out of 380 safe seats).

“In other words, nearly 40% of Congress was effectively elected without having to earn a single vote — leaving 101,486,410 voters (39% of eligible Americans) without a meaningful choice in who represents them,” the report states.

This is the third election cycle in which Unite America has studied these issues, and the “primary problem” is growing.

In 2020, 10 percent of eligible voters effectively elected 83 percent of House members, and in 2022, just 8 percent chose 83 percent, according to UA.. This is happening at a time when more and more Americans are declaring themselves to be independent of political parties.

Read More

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
People holiding "Yes on 1" signs

People urge support for Question 1 in Maine.

Kyle Bailey

The Fahey Q&A: Kyle Bailey discusses Maine’s Question 1

Since organizing the Voters Not Politicians2018 ballot initiative that put citizens in charge ofdrawing Michigan's legislative maps, Fahey has been the founding executive director of The PeoplePeople, which is forming statewide networks to promote government accountability. Sheregularly interviews colleagues in the world of democracy reform for The Fulcrum.

Kyle Bailey is a former Maine state representative who managed the landmark ballot measure campaigns to win and protect ranked choice voting. He serves as campaign manager for Citizens to End SuperPACs and the Yes On 1 campaign to pass Question 1, a statewide ballot initiative that would place a limit of $5,000 on contributions to political action committees.

Keep ReadingShow less
Ballot envelopes moving through a sorting machine

Mailed ballots are sorted by a machine at the Denver Elections Division.

Hyoung Chang/The Denver Post

GOP targets fine print of voting by mail in battleground state suits

Rosenfeld is the editor and chief correspondent of Voting Booth, a project of the Independent Media Institute.

In 2020’s presidential election, 17 million more Americans voted than in 2016’s election. That record-setting turnout was historic and even more remarkable because it came in the midst of a deadly pandemic. A key reason for the increase was most states simplified and expanded voting with mailed-out ballots — which 43 percent of voters used.

Some battleground states saw dramatic expansions. Michigan went from 26 percent of its electorate voting with mailed-out ballots in 2016 to 59 percent in 2020. Pennsylvania went from 4 percent to 40 percent. The following spring, academics found that mailing ballots to voters had lifted 2020’s voter turnout across the political spectrum and had benefited Republican candidates — especially in states that previously had limited the option.

Keep ReadingShow less
Members of Congress in the House of Representatives

Every four years, Congress gathers to count electoral votes.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

No country still uses an electoral college − except the U.S.

Holzer is an associate professor of political science at Westminster College.

The United States is the only democracy in the world where a presidential candidate can get the most popular votes and still lose the election. Thanks to the Electoral College, that has happened five times in the country’s history. The most recent examples are from 2000, when Al Gore won the popular vote but George W. Bush won the Electoral College after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, and 2016, when Hillary Clinton got more votes nationwide than Donald Trump but lost in the Electoral College.

The Founding Fathers did not invent the idea of an electoral college. Rather, they borrowed the concept from Europe, where it had been used to pick emperors for hundreds of years.

Keep ReadingShow less