Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

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.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

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

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