Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Will election reforms make a difference (again)?

Sen. Robert La Follette

Sen. Robert La Follette led the way on election reforms 100 years ago. There's another way upon us now.

Klug served in the House of Representatives from 1991 to 1999. He hosts the political podcast “ Lost in the Middle: America’s Political Orphans.”

As Mark Twain famously wrote: “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it rhymes.”

At the turn of the 20th century, a wave of political reform swept the country, led by Wisconsin Sen. Robert La Follette and his sometimes ally — and often sparring partner — President Theodore Roosevelt.

Today it seems hard to believe that one of their cornerstone initiatives was even necessary: They reached halfway across the world to steal from the Australians the secret ballot. Before then, pre-printed, filled-out ballots were handed out by political machines in major U.S. cities.


Soon a second idea swept the country: the direct election of senators. Since the enactment of the Constitution, state legislatures had made those decisions, but now citizens would.

Today a new era of reform fervor is sweeping the country.

“It certainly parallels the progressive reform era of about a hundred years ago,” says Katherine Gehl of the National Association of Nonpartisan Reformers. “People are frustrated with the political system. And there's a subset of those people who are proposing multiple different solutions.”

The most far-reaching, comprehensive plan focuses on variations of ranked-choice voting. Some versions of RCV pair with an open primary in which candidates run without party identifications. Voters rank them and a subset, usually four or five, moves onto the general election.

In that second round the candidate with the lowest total is dropped, and that person’s ballots are redistributed to voters’ second-choice candidates. And so it goes, until there is a winner. The underlying assumption is that fringe candidates will fall by the wayside and more moderate consensus candidates will win.

Maine and Alaska already use a variation, as do New York City and San Francisco. Battleground Nevada has a referendum this fall on phasing in the voting system in 2026.

But as support builds around the country, so does skepticism. San Francisco political scientist Josh McDaniels has studied his hometown mayoral election. “My headline on this party reform shows it has very minimal effects,” he said. “What reformers promise is incredibly unrealistic in terms of what tinkering with the rules of primary elections can actually accomplish.”

Will ranked-choice voting and open primaries change the incentives and results of American elections, or just reshuffle the deck chairs? I explore those issues in “The Ghost of Bob LaFollette,” episode 12 of “Lost in the Middle: America’s Political Orphans.”

https://scottklug.substack.com/p/episode-12-the-ghost-of-bob-la-follette


Read More

With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

Should the U.S. nationalize elections? A constitutional analysis of federalism, the Elections Clause, and the risks of centralized control over voting systems.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Why Nationalizing Elections Threatens America’s Federalist Design

The Federalism Question: Why Nationalizing Elections Deserves Skepticism

The renewed push to nationalize American elections, presented as a necessary reform to ensure uniformity and fairness, deserves the same skepticism our founders directed toward concentrated federal power. The proposal, though well-intentioned, misunderstands both the constitutional architecture of our republic and the practical wisdom in decentralized governance.

The Constitutional Framework Matters

The Constitution grants states explicit authority over the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections, with Congress retaining only the power to "make or alter such Regulations." This was not an oversight by the framers; it was intentional design. The Tenth Amendment reinforces this principle: powers not delegated to the federal government remain with the states and the people. Advocates for nationalization often cite the Elections Clause as justification, but constitutional permission is not constitutional wisdom.

Keep ReadingShow less
Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

A voter registration drive in Corpus Christi, Texas, on Oct. 5, 2024. The deadline to register to vote for Texas' March 3 primary election is Feb. 2, 2026. Changes to USPS policies may affect whether a voter registration application is processed on time if it's not postmarked by the deadline.

Gabriel Cárdenas for Votebeat

Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

Texans seeking to register to vote or cast a ballot by mail may not want to wait until the last minute, thanks to new guidance from the U.S. Postal Service.

The USPS last month advised that it may not postmark a piece of mail on the same day that it takes possession of it. Postmarks are applied once mail reaches a processing facility, it said, which may not be the same day it’s dropped in a mailbox, for example.

Keep ReadingShow less
Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
People voting at voting booths.

A little-known interstate compact could change how the U.S. elects presidents by 2028, replacing the Electoral College with the national popular vote.

Getty Images, VIEW press

The Quiet Campaign That Could Rewrite the 2028 Election

Most Americans are unaware, but a quiet campaign in states across the country is moving toward one of the biggest changes in presidential elections since the nation was founded.

A movement called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is happening mostly out of public view and could soon change how the United States picks its president, possibly as early as 2028.

Keep ReadingShow less