Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

How Alaska is making government work again

Peopel waiting in line near a sign that reads "Vote Here: Polling Place"

People wait to vote in the 2024 election at city hall in Anchorage, Alaska.

Hasan Akbas/Anadolu via Getty Images

At the end of a bitter and closely divided election season, there’s a genuine bright spot for democracy from our 49th state: Alaskans decided to keep the state’s system of open primaries and ranked choice voting because it is working.

This is good news not only for Alaska, but for all of us ready for a government that works together to get things done for voters.


Alaska’s new system has only been in place for two years. Yet, voters protected it from a repeal effort driven from the extremes because it has already delivered results that Americans in other cities and states would be wise to look to.

I was born and raised in Alaska, so I can attest that ranked choice voting and open primaries have returned a spirit of problem-solving and collegiality to a state where voters want practical results instead of partisan plays. The reality of the state’s terrain and climate require Alaskans to rely on our neighbors no matter their politics.

Before voters enacted this reform, however, Alaska’s Legislature had stopped working this way. Like so many legislatures across the country, lawmaking was stifled by elected leaders beholden to a small partisan primary electorate rather than the needs of the majority. Many Alaskan voters felt alienated by how toxic and partisan elections had become, contributing to lower turnout and engagement, particularly among rural and Alaska Native communities.

As a result, Alaska’s Legislature was one of the least productive in the country. Lawmakers failed to agree on a budget and couldn’t pass key bills on topics like education, pensions and health care.

Now, that problem-solving spirit is back. With ranked choice voting and open primaries, Alaskans running for office need to talk — and listen — to all of their voters. In Alaska’s system, the top four finishers in an open primary advance to the general election. There, voters have the option of ranking candidates according to their preferences. The winner is the candidate supported by the majority of Alaska’s voters.

In other words, candidates campaign not just to a partisan base, but to all voters in their state.

Voters — including the nearly 60 percent of Alaska voters unaffiliated with either party — have seen firsthand how effective this new system is. In 2022, nearly 20 percent of Alaskans ranked candidates of multiple parties, simply voting for the candidates they thought would do the best job. Alaskans have found ranked choice voting easy to use and like the results it generated.

Yet, the most important improvement hasn’t been the election itself, but what comes after. Those who win know that they have a mandate to solve problems, having won support from a real majority of voters. As a result, lawmakers from across Alaska’s political landscape — Republicans, Democrats and independents — have come together to create governing coalitions that have made real nonpartisan progress on addressing energy issues, growing the state’s economy and workforce, and improving public education.

And so a broad coalition of Alaskans came forth to protect the reform, even as extreme partisans encouraged them to repeal it and put them back in charge.

The final results were close. But Alaskans of all backgrounds were heard loud and clear. The new system worked, and it is here to stay.

This is a proven and viable system that rescued Alaskan politics from the ditch of dysfunction and potholes of polarization. Just think what ranked choice voting and open primaries could do in your state.

It’s true that voters in three other states (Idaho, Colorado, Nevada) turned similar systems down this year — in part because they were drowned out by millions of dollars and old-fashioned partisan misinformation from those seeking to preserve their hold on power But Alaska is proof that the people who use this system like it and will work to retain it.

Meanwhile, ranked choice voting’s momentum continued unabated at the city level in November. Washington, D.C., voted overwhelmingly to adopt it, as did Oak Park, Illinois. That makes 31 wins in its last 32 votes at the city level, for what has become one of the nation’s most potent and popular election reforms.

That march forward will continue, and the governing results from Alaska are the reason why. Ranked choice voting will keep growing because it works for voters and elected leaders who want to get things done — and voters know it.

Sumpter is president and CEO of FairVote, a nonpartisan organization seeking better elections.

Read More

An oversized ballot box surrounded by people.

Young people worldwide form new parties to reshape politics—yet America’s two-party system blocks them.

Getty Images, J Studios

No Country for Young Politicians—and How To Fix That

In democracies around the world, young people have started new political parties whenever the establishment has sidelined their views or excluded them from policymaking. These parties have sometimes reinvigorated political competition, compelled established parties to take previously neglected issues seriously, or encouraged incumbent leaders to find better ways to include and reach out to young voters.

In Europe, a trio in their twenties started Volt in 2017 as a pan-European response to Brexit, and the party has managed to win seats in the European Parliament and in some national legislatures. In Germany, young people concerned about climate change created Klimaliste, a party committed to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as per the Paris Agreement. Although the party hasn’t won seats at the federal level, they have managed to win some municipal elections. In Chile, leaders of the 2011 student protests, who then won seats as independent candidates, created political parties like Revolución Democrática and Convergencia Social to institutionalize their movements. In 2022, one of these former student leaders, Gabriel Boric, became the president of Chile at 36 years old.

Keep ReadingShow less
How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

Demonstrators gather outside of The United States Supreme Court during an oral arguments in Gill v. Whitford to call for an end to partisan gerrymandering on October 3, 2017 in Washington, DC

Getty Images, Olivier Douliery

How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground. ~ Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Col. Edward Carrington, Paris, 27 May 1788

The Problem We Face

The U.S. House of Representatives was designed as the chamber of Congress most directly tethered to the people. Article I of the Constitution mandates that seats be apportioned among the states according to population and that members face election every two years—design features meant to keep representatives responsive to shifting public sentiment. Unlike the Senate, which prioritizes state sovereignty and representation, the House translates raw population counts into political voice: each House district is to contain roughly the same number of residents, ensuring that every citizen’s vote carries comparable weight. In principle, then, the House serves as the nation’s demographic mirror, channeling the diverse preferences of the electorate into lawmaking and acting as a safeguard against unresponsive or oligarchic governance.

Nationally, the mismatch between the overall popular vote and the partisan split in House seats is small, with less than a 1% tilt. But state-level results tell a different story. Take Connecticut: Democrats hold all five seats despite Republicans winning over 40% of the statewide vote. In Oklahoma, the inverse occurs—Republicans control every seat even though Democrats consistently earn around 40% of the vote.

Keep ReadingShow less
Once Again, Politicians Are Choosing Their Voters. It’s Time for Voters To Choose Back.
A pile of political buttons sitting on top of a table

Once Again, Politicians Are Choosing Their Voters. It’s Time for Voters To Choose Back.

Once again, politicians are trying to choose their voters to guarantee their own victories before the first ballot is cast.

In the latest round of redistricting wars, Texas Republicans are attempting a rare mid-decade redistricting to boost their advantage ahead of the 2026 midterms, and Democratic governors in California and New York are signaling they’re ready to “fight fire with fire” with their own partisan gerrymanders.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stolen Land, Stolen Votes: Native Americans Defending the VRA Protects Us All – and We Should Support Them

Wilson Deschine sits at the "be my voice" voter registration stand at the Navajo Nation annual rodeo, in Window Rock.

Getty Images, David Howells

Stolen Land, Stolen Votes: Native Americans Defending the VRA Protects Us All – and We Should Support Them

On July 24, the Supreme Court temporarily blocked a Circuit Court order in a far-reaching case that could affect the voting rights of all Americans. Native American tribes and individuals filed the case as part of their centuries-old fight for rights in their own land.

The underlying subject of the case confronts racial gerrymandering against America’s first inhabitants, where North Dakota’s 2021 redistricting reduced Native Americans’ chances of electing up to three state representatives to just one. The specific issue that the Supreme Court may consider, if it accepts hearing the case, is whether individuals and associations can seek justice under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). That is because the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, contradicting other courts, said that individuals do not have standing to bring Section 2 cases.

Keep ReadingShow less