Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Independence Day can celebrate the spirit of independents

Independence Day can celebrate the spirit of independents
Getty Images

Anderson edited "Leveraging: A Political, Economic and Societal Framework" (Springer, 2014), has taught at five universities and ran for the Democratic nomination for a Maryland congressional seat in 2016.

In 2026 America needs a Declaration of Independents, one that will mark the 250th anniversary celebration of the Declaration of Independence. Yes, our great country, mired in deep conflicts, entrenched polarization in Washington, and pathetic hostility needs to turn to individuals and groups which are driven by an independent frame of mind to rescue us.


In the last Gallup poll 41 percent of Americans identified as independents. The independent frame of mind that is so sorely needed should not in itself reflect a particular ideological point of view. Thus it should not be a centrist point of view which reflects a middle ground between the Democrats and Republicans. Nor should it be a radical centrist point of view which reflects a unique synthesis of both parties or some standpoint that transcends them but still preserves core ideas from both. What is needed instead is a burst of independent candidates and organizations that stand for points of view that differ from the two mainstream parties. There might be six independent points of view, including libertarian, green, moderate centrist and radical centrist.

Ideally the independent candidates for office would win races and reduce the power of the two major parties. The upshot would be that Democrats and Republicans would face challenges from many independent perspectives, and they would lose many of the races. Attacked from so many points of view, they would not be able to withstand the onslaught.

This is ideally how things would evolve. The goal would not be to ruin one or both parties. Instead, it would be to put both parties in check and compel both parties to work with the independents in their district or state or nationally to reach tripartisan solutions to problems. Indeed, it is time to jettison the goal of achieving bipartisan solutions because it rests on the controversial assumption that there are only two legitimate points of view to be reconciled. This is not the case in the United Kingdom, France, Germany or Israel. We must strive to make it not the case in the United States.

The challenge will be to cultivate and celebrate an attitude of independence that motivates enough citizens to vote for the independent candidates without blasting the two major parties. For what is needed is not a war against the Democrats and Republicans but an honest departure from them. The reason this strategy might work over a five to ten year time period is that there would be no consistent target for Democrats and Republicans to bring down. There would only be a temperament to criticize, and it would be hard to criticize a temperament that revolved around freedom of thought and disappointment with rigidity, hostility, and dysfunction.

The attitude that would be targeted would revolve around what used to unite us -- a love of independence. The Declaration of Independents we need will rally around the value of independence that grounded our country 250 years ago. Whether the issue is the environment, guns, immigration, family policy, foreign policy or racial relations, we need a third force in American politics that will shift the focus from the boxing ring fight between the Democrats and Republicans to a challenge to both parties from multiple ideological points of view.

In the United States, what we need now is not so much multiple parties but multiple independent perspectives. Parties are organizational machines and are very useful for the Democrats and Republicans, especially for raising money. A frontal attack from another party is not likely to succeed. We need the same ingenuity which defeated the British in the Revolutionary War -- attack the enemy from a range of places at once using guerilla tactics. Head-on warfare would have failed against the stronger British armed forces.

Likewise today. You can't go after the Democrats and Republicans head-on. Instead, individual races need candidates with an independent temperament which stands in different ideological places. Together, however, these independent voices will gather steam and leverage the momentum of other independent candidates and groups. Gradually, the independent temperament will strengthen, until it becomes a third force in American politics.

Structural changes will be needed in the electoral system, including ranked choice voting and open primaries. But independent candidates and voters and moderates from both parties need a broader strategy to move forward. Although there need not be and should not be one orchestrating organization, a set of organizations, individual candidates and the media, traditional and social, can create the revolution.

Read More

Seattle Votes on Democracy Vouchers Designed To Counteract Wealthy Donors

If approved, the Democracy Voucher program would bring in $4.5 million each year through a property tax.

Road Red Runner/Adobe Stock

Seattle Votes on Democracy Vouchers Designed To Counteract Wealthy Donors

A public funding mechanism for Seattle elections is up for renewal in next week's election.

The Democracy Voucher program was passed 10 years ago. It offers voters four $25 vouchers to use each election cycle for candidates who accept certain fundraising and spending limits. Supporters said it is a model for more inclusive democracy, touting higher turnout, increased participation from more small donors and a more diverse candidate field.

Spencer Olson, spokesperson for the group People Powered Elections Seattle, which supports Proposition 1, said the program helps level the playing field.

"It's really important that people's voices are heard and that candidates can run being supported by their constituents," Olson contended. "Versus just listening to those wealthiest donors, those special interests that have historically been the loudest voices at the table and really dominated what priorities rise to the top."

The voucher is supported by a property tax. Olson and other supporters hope to bring the model statewide. Critics said the program is not big enough to make a difference in elections and has not curbed outside spending. Ballots are due by 8 p.m. Tuesday.

Olson pointed out the vouchers have succeeded in encouraging more diverse participation in local elections.

"The intention of the program was to bring a public financing program to Seattle elections to help empower more candidates -- more diverse candidates, women, renters, people of color -- to have equal access to be able to run, and run competitive elections without having to rely on wealthy donors, special interests," Olson emphasized.

Olson noted because the money comes from a dedicated tax levy, unused vouchers roll over to the next election.

"The goal isn't to create an unlimited pot of money but to be able to provide resources for candidates to run with the community's support," Olson stressed. "But it's not a blank check at the same time."

Eric Tegethoff is a journalist covering the Northwest for Public News Service.

Keep ReadingShow less
Defining The Democracy Movement: Rahmin Sarabi
- YouTube

Defining The Democracy Movement: Rahmin Sarabi

The Fulcrum presents The Path Forward: Defining the Democracy Reform Movement. Scott Warren's interview series engages diverse thought leaders to elevate the conversation about building a thriving and healthy democratic republic that fulfills its potential as a national social and political game-changer. This initiative is the start of focused collaborations and dialogue led by The Bridge Alliance and The Fulcrum teams to help the movement find a path forward.

The latest interview in this series features Rahmin Sarabi, founder and Director of the American Public Trust, an organization dedicated to promoting and implementing deliberative democracy practices, such as citizen assemblies.

Keep ReadingShow less
Why Recognizing the State of Palestine Does Not “Reward Hamas”
An Israeli airstrike hit Deir al-Balah in central Gaza on Jan. 1, 2024.
Majdi Fathi/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Why Recognizing the State of Palestine Does Not “Reward Hamas”

President Donald Trump finally acknowledged there is “real starvation” in Gaza—a reality that has generated momentum among holdout countries to recognize a State of Palestine, as 147 of 193 U.N. members have already done. Trump claims that this impermissibly “rewards Hamas.” Concerns about the optics of “rewarding” a militant group that is not the country’s government should not drive the decision to recognize Palestine as a state or the decision to maintain diplomatic relations with its government.

Countries that have already recognized the State of Palestine point to the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination and the fact that the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) forms a defined geographic area with a government and a population—the traditional criteria for statehood. Countries that have not recognized the State of Palestine point to the Palestinian Authority’s (PA) lack of effective control over parts of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and to the idea that recognition can be used as future diplomatic leverage. But waiting to recognize a state of Palestine until after there is a negotiated agreement between Israel and the PA is an outdated position that amounts to “kicking the can” down an interminable road.

Keep ReadingShow less