Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Florida voters will decide whether to end partisan primaries

Miami, Florida, voting location

Florida may be on the verge of scrapping partisan primaries for most elections.

Cliff Hawkings/Getty Images

Floridians will decide this fall whether to transform the state's polarized politics by opening most primaries to all voters, regardless of party.

Because Florida is the nation's biggest battleground state, the result will be enormously important to the future of one of the core causes of the democracy reform world — diminishing the Republican and Democratic duopoly over political power.

The measure's place on the November ballot was assured Thursday by the state Supreme Court, which is called on to review every constitutional amendment proposed through the gathering of petition signatures. The court ruled 4-1 that the proposal met the necessary legal and clarity requirements.


Attorneys for both parties, which agree on almost nothing in Florida these days, united behind the same argument in trying to derail the referendum: Adoption would deprive partisan loyalists of what should be their exclusive right to choose the preferred candidate of their party.

Advocates of opening the system argued that what is paramount should be the rights of almost 3.7 million unaffiliated Floridians to participate in the political process. The current system, they maintained, is effectively disenfranchising almost 30 percent of the state's electorate — which is growing faster in the state than registration in either party — by barring them from casting ballots at a crucial stage in the electoral process.

Outside of court, they argue that the current primary system, because it reliably produces very conservative or very liberal candidates, fails to reflect the more centrist nature of the population and is unable to adequately respond to the state's needs.

"This may be the most important issue on the ballot in any state other than the presidential election because, all across the country, everyone is looking,'' said Gene Stearns, who runs All Voters Vote, which has been pushing the referendum for five years with $6 million in backing from Miami health care mogul Mike Fernandez.

"If Florida allows nonpartisan elections, everyone else will follow," Stearns said. "The whole objective is to reduce the toxicity of our political process."

Sixty percent of the state will need to vote "yes" for the change to take effect, which would happen in 2024. Then, all registered voters would face a single primary ballot for governor, other statewide offices and seats in the Legislature. The top two vote-getters, even if from the same party, would advance to the general election.

The benefits, advocates say, include rewarding the candidates with the broadest (and likely most centrist) appeal and insulating candidates from defeat at the hands of well-financed opposition campaigns that appeal to the ideological extremes.

Florida is among a minority of states where primaries are completely closed to voters not registered red or blue. Most states allow some sort of crossover or independent participation.

Terms for the far-reaching system that Florida is contemplating include "nonpartisan blanket primary" and "jungle primary." Nebraska was the first to embrace this system, back in 1936, but only for election to what's officially a nonpartisan Legislature. Louisiana (since 1975), Washington (since 2004) and California (since 2010) conduct top-two primaries for both state-level races and seats in Congress. Florida's measure would not apply to Senate and House races.


Read More

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Crowd of people walking on a street.

Andy Andrews//Getty Images

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Biologist and author Paul Ehrlich, the most influential Chicken Little of the last century, died at the age of 93 this week. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” launched decades of institutional panic in government, entertainment and journalism.

Ehrlich’s core neo-Malthusian argument was that overpopulation would exhaust the supply of food and natural resources, leading to a cascade of catastrophes around the world. “The Population Bomb” opens with a bold prediction, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

People clear rubble in a house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026 in Tehran, Iran. The United States and Israel continued their joint attack on Iran that began on February 28. Iran retaliated by firing waves of missiles and drones at Israel, and targeting U.S. allies in the region.

Getty Images, Majid Saeedi

Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

Most of what we have heard from the administration as it pertains to the Iran War is swagger and bro-talk. A few days into the war, the White House released a social media video that combined footage of the bombardment with clips from video games. Not long after, it released a second video, titled “Justice the American Way,” that mixed images of the U.S. military with scenes from movies like Gladiator and Top Gun Maverick.

Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, War Secretary Pete Hegseth boasted of “death and destruction from the sky all day long.” “They are toast, and they know it,” he said. “This was never meant to be a fair fight... we are punching them while they’re down.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A student in uniform walking through a campus.

A Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadet walks through campus November 7, 2003 in Princeton, New Jersey.

Getty Images, Spencer Platt

Hegseth is Dumbing Down the Military (on Purpose)

One day before the United States began an ill-defined and illegal war of indefinite length with Iran, Pete Hegseth angrily attacked a different enemy: the Ivy League. The Secretary of War denounced Ivy League universities as "woke breeding grounds of toxic indoctrination” and then eliminated long-standing college fellowship programs with more than a dozen elite colleges, which had historically served as a pipeline for service members to the upper ranks of military leadership. Of the schools now on Hegseth’s "no-fly list," four sit in the top ten of the World’s Top Universities for 2026. So, why does the Secretary of War not want his armed forces to have the best education available? Because he wants a military without a brain.

For a guy obsessed with being the strongest and most lethal force in the world, cutting access to world-class schools is a bizarre gambit. It does reveal Hegseth doesn’t consider intelligence a factor–let alone an asset–in strength or lethality. That tracks. Hegseth alleges the Ivies infect officers with “globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks…” God forbid the tip of the sword of our foreign policy has knowledge of international cooperation and global interconnectedness. The Ivy League has its own issues, but the Pentagon’s claim that they "fail to deliver rigorous education grounded in realism” is almost laughable. I’m a veteran Lieutenant Commander with two Ivy League degrees, both paid for with military tuition assistance, and I promise: it was rigorous. Meanwhile, are Hegseth’s performative politics grounded in reality? Attacking Harvard on social media the eve of initiating a new war with a foreign adversary is disgraceful, and even delusional.

Keep ReadingShow less
Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?
Person working at a desk with a laptop and books.

Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?

Draft an important email without using AI. Write it from scratch — no suggestions, no autocomplete, and no prompt to ChatGPT to compose or revise the email.

Now ask yourself: Did it feel slower? Harder? Slightly uncomfortable?

Keep ReadingShow less