Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Suits seek e-signing for anti-gerrymander ballot measures in N.D., Nevada

Digital signature
Andrew_Rybalko/Getty Images

Opponents of partisan gerrymandering have asked federal courts in two Western states to keep their referendum proposals alive by permitting electronic signatures on ballot petitions.

The lawsuits, brought Thursday in Nevada and North Dakota, join similar litigation in seven other states filed since the coronavirus pandemic made it effectively impossible to pursue grassroots citizen initiatives the traditional way — by canvassing door-to-door or outside retailers in search of handwritten signatures.

But only one of those, in Arkansas, is similarly in support of a top item on the democracy reform agenda: taking legislative redistricting away from politicians, who have an obvious interest in preserving their power, and turning it over to independent commissions.


The proposal in Nevada, which needs 98,000 supporters by June 24 to earn a place on the November ballot, is exclusively about forming a panel to reconfigure the state's four congressional districts and the lines for the solidly Democratic Legislature.

But the state requires its adoption in two elections, meaning such a panel would not be created in time to tackle the redistricting for this decade in response to population changes revealed in the current, Covid-19-delayed census.

The proposal in North Dakota, which needs 27,000 signatures by July 6, is much more expansive. In addition to a putting the new and nonpartisan state ethics commission (itself created by referendum in 2018) in charge of next year's remapping of the reliably Republican Legislature — the one at-large congressional district cannot be altered — the measure would revamp the state's elections two ways:

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

All candidates would appear on a single primary ballot, with the top four finishers (regardless of party) advancing to November. And then the winner would be chosen in a ranked-choice election, with voters listing candidates in order of preference and an automatic runoff weaning out the poorer performers until there was a single candidate on a majority of ballots.

The lawsuits argue that in-person signature requirements pose unconstitutional burdens on the free speech and equal protection rights of the voters, at least until the public health emergency is over.

North Dakota is among the few states that have never imposed formal stay-at-home restrictions, and those curbs are on course to get lifted in Nevada at the end of next week. Both suits ask for deadline extensions as well as the use of online or email signature gathering.

Virginia is for now the only state with a redistricting commission proposal on the November ballot. Approval, which seems likely, would mean at least some maps in 14 states are drawn for the coming decade by independent panels.

Two weeks ago Massachusetts became the only state so far that's reversed its policies in response to a lawsuit and allowed electronic signatures for initiatives. Along with independent commission advocates in Arkansas, proponents for ballot measures on an array of topics in Montana, Arizona, Colorado, Ohio, and Oklahoma have also sued in hopes of changing signature rules or getting deadlines extended. But grassroots groups in many more states have suspended their efforts in the face of the pandemic.

Read More

One Lesson from the Elections: Looking At Universal Voting

A roll of "voted" stickers.

Pexels, Element5 Digital

One Lesson from the Elections: Looking At Universal Voting

The analysis and parsing of learned lessons from the 2024 elections will continue for a long time. What did the campaigns do right and wrong? What policies will emerge from the new arrangements of power? What do the parties need to do for the future?

An equally important question is what lessons are there for our democratic structures and processes. One positive lesson is that voting itself was almost universally smooth and effective; we should applaud the election officials who made that happen. But, many elements of the 2024 elections are deeply challenging, from the increasingly outsized role of billionaires in the process to the onslaught of misinformation and disinformation.

Keep ReadingShow less
MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

A check mark and hands.

Photo by Allison Saeng on Unsplash. Unsplash+ License obtained by the author.

MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

Originally published by Independent Voter News.

Today, I am proud to share an exciting milestone in my journey as an advocate for democracy and electoral reform.

Keep ReadingShow less
Half-Baked Alaska

A photo of multiple checked boxes.

Getty Images / Thanakorn Lappattaranan

Half-Baked Alaska

This past year’s elections saw a number of state ballot initiatives of great national interest, which proposed the adoption of two “unusual” election systems for state and federal offices. Pairing open nonpartisan primaries with a general election using ranked choice voting, these reforms were rejected by the citizens of Colorado, Idaho, and Nevada. The citizens of Alaska, however, who were the first to adopt this dual system in 2020, narrowly confirmed their choice after an attempt to repeal it in November.

Ranked choice voting, used in Alaska’s general elections, allows voters to rank their candidate choices on their ballot and then has multiple rounds of voting until one candidate emerges with a majority of the final vote and is declared the winner. This more representative result is guaranteed because in each round the weakest candidate is dropped, and the votes of that candidate’s supporters automatically transfer to their next highest choice. Alaska thereby became the second state after Maine to use ranked choice voting for its state and federal elections, and both have had great success in their use.

Keep ReadingShow less
Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

The United States Supreme Court.

Getty Images / Rudy Sulgan

Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

Fourteen years ago, after the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the popular blanket primary system, Californians voted to replace the deeply unpopular closed primary that replaced it with a top-two system. Since then, Democratic Party insiders, Republican Party insiders, minor political parties, and many national reform and good government groups, have tried (and failed) to deep-six the system because the public overwhelmingly supports it (over 60% every year it’s polled).

Now, three minor political parties, who opposed the reform from the start and have unsuccessfully sued previously, are once again trying to overturn it. The Peace and Freedom Party, the Green Party, and the Libertarian Party have teamed up to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Their brief repeats the same argument that the courts have previously rejected—that the top-two system discriminates against parties and deprives voters of choice by not guaranteeing every party a place on the November ballot.

Keep ReadingShow less