Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Historic Bipartisan Reform Passed Into Law

With SB 16 now law, independent voters will have the freedom to participate in the most consequential elections.

News

Historic Bipartisan Reform Passed Into Law

A voter receiving information.

Getty Images, SeventyFour

On April 8, 2025, New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham signed SB 16 into law, a historic bipartisan reform that gives more than 330,000 independent voters—who make up nearly 25% of New Mexico’s electorate—the right to vote in the state’s primary elections, starting in 2026. This continues an overall nationwide trend of states opening their primary elections to more voters.

“New Mexico’s open primaries law will ensure that every eligible voter has a say in every taxpayer-funded election, not just those who choose to affiliate with a party,” said Nick Troiano, Executive Director of Unite America. “For too long, a quarter of New Mexicans have been locked out of their state’s primary elections—which in most cases are the only elections that matter. Ending closed primaries is an important step toward increasing participation and representation in our democracy.”


SB 16 passed with bipartisan support in both chambers, and supporters noted that the law would improve participation in New Mexico’s elections.

“Democracy only works if we all play a part. When I took office, I wasn’t just elected to represent Republicans but all of my constituents. That includes my constituents in our state’s fastest growing party—independents,” said New Mexico State Sen. Crystal Brantley (R). “Senate Bill 16 gives everyone a voice and removes barriers for those who want to see the best candidate come forward from each party, not just the one that tacks hardest left or right to win the primary.”

“Opening primary elections by allowing voters registered as independent or unaffiliated to participate in taxpayer-funded elections improves voting fairness and, in turn, democracy,” added New Mexico State Sen. Majority Leader Peter Wirth (D). “I’m glad to have sponsored the bill bringing this change to New Mexico. And as evidenced by the votes on the Senate floor, it’s an update that both major parties can get behind.”

New Mexico Voters First and New Mexico Open Elections led the multi-year campaign to open the state’s primaries, spearheading a coalition that included NM Native Vote, Common Cause New Mexico, Conservation Voters New Mexico, University of New Mexico College Democrats, and the Veterans and Military Families Caucus.

“We have dedicated significant time and effort to building a strong coalition, engaging legislators, and mobilizing independent voters across New Mexico,” said New Mexico Voters First Executive Director Sila Avcil. “This progress would not have been possible without the unwavering support of our advocates. New Mexico deserves fair and representative elections, and I am honored to be part of this movement to pass SB 16.”

Because most general elections nationwide are uncompetitive for federal and state races, primary contests effectively determine winners before a single vote is cast. This is the Primary Problem in politics today, where a tiny share of the electorate determines most election outcomes in low-turnout party primaries.

In 2024, 83% of New Mexico’s state house races were effectively decided in closed primaries where independents couldn’t vote. Votes cast in those 83% of general elections were meaningless because they had no bearing on the outcome. In fact, only 14% of New Mexicans cast meaningful votes last year. (A meaningful vote is a vote cast in a competitive election that actually determines the outcomes. Full methodology here.)

New Mexico’s SB 16 continues a nationwide trend of states opening their primaries. Over the past decade, Colorado and Maine have opened their primaries to independents, while Alaska voters went a step further by adopting open, all-candidate primaries. The number of states with closed primaries, where independents can’t fully participate, is now down to 16.

Read More

AI chip
a computer chip with the letter a on top of it
Photo by Igor Omilaev on Unsplash

We Should Regulate AI to Make It Grow Faster

The debate over artificial intelligence has become divided between two powerful ideas: that we need a “moratorium” to slow AI until we can make it safe, and that regulating AI will slow the innovation we need for our economy and national security. Both concerns are legitimate. But “moratorium” and “slowing AI growth” are divisive terms: they reassure those concerned about AI's safety, economic and environmental consequences while alarming those who see AI competition and national security as urgent priorities. We need a different starting point—meaningful regulation that provides the safeguards necessary to protect people, communities and the environment while creating the conditions for AI to continue growing. The experiences of Europe and China challenge the assumption that regulation must slow AI.

China has combined increasingly detailed, technology-specific AI regulation with substantial government support for AI development. Recent studies provide evidence that this approach can promote innovation. One 2026 study of Chinese companies from 2017 through 2023 found that the creation of national AI innovation and development pilot zones significantly increased corporate digital transformation, in part through increased research and development, human capital and reduced transition costs. Another 2026 study, covering Chinese manufacturing companies from 2014 through 2024, found that the same policy significantly promoted the adoption of intelligent technologies.

Keep ReadingShow less
The History of U.S. Prevention Through Deterrence: Effective Border Policy or Humanitarian Risk?

The History of U.S. Prevention Through Deterrence: Effective Border Policy or Humanitarian Risk?

A Brief History of Prevention Through Deterrence

The U.S. Border Patrol agency has evolved greatly over the years, shifting its focus to address changing national security concerns. It was originally established in 1924 to restrict illegal immigration by Chinese and European immigrants before moving to restrict alcohol smuggling during Prohibition. The agency adopted its current focus on illegal immigration from Mexico during the 1970s, when immigration pressures coincided with a severe economic recession in the United States. In 1994, the Border Patrol released a strategy document with the support of the Clinton administration which introduced an approach to immigration known as Prevention Through Deterrence. This tactic aimed to discourage border crossings by funneling immigrants through border entry points with harsh terrain, in contrast with previous policies based on arrest and apprehension post-entry.

Successful Prevention Through Deterrence is measured by fewer encounters and apprehensions at the border, indicating that illegal attempts to enter the country have been prevented and deterred. Barriers to entry are policed by a range of physical infrastructure like fences, vehicle barriers, and other blockades designed to stop illegal foot and vehicle traffic. These measures are supported by camera- and thermal-based surveillance systems as well as measures like deportation and criminal charges which impose legal consequences on migrants. The focus of Prevention Through Deterrence operations themselves is twofold: establishing control of high-traffic border sectors and using security measures to enable the seizure of contraband.

Keep ReadingShow less
A microphone in the foreground and a crowd, blurry in the background.

INC ‘26 gathered independent leaders in D.C. to unveil a seven-candidate slate, a Fulcrum Caucus strategy and new tools for corruption-free governance.

Getty Images, uschools

Independent Movement Unites at INC ’26 to Build National Power

From September 23–25, leaders from across the American independent political movement gathered at the JW Marriott in Washington, D.C., for the fourth Independent National Convention (INC ’26). Produced by United Independents, the event brought together hundreds of participants representing political reform organizations, independent campaigns, alternative parties, civic initiatives and grassroots organizing efforts.

The gathering reflected the breadth of activity outside the traditional two-party system while addressing a persistent challenge: translating America's large independent constituency into greater political representation, institutional capacity, and coordinated action.

Keep ReadingShow less
Meeting, handshake and business people with deal in office for funding approval and success.

Four Reds and four Blues reached unanimous Points of Agreement on immigration, then presented them to Reps. Fitzpatrick and Suozzi. Here’s how it worked.

Jacob Wackerhausen/Getty Images

On Immigration, Common Ground May Be Closer Than We Think

Immigration has become one of the issues pulling Americans apart. Earlier this month, at a constituent conversation in Bristol, Pennsylvania, I watched eight Americans with very different political views offer a glimpse of how it does not have to stay that way.

Four “Reds” and four “Blues” — terms used for participants on the political right and left — sat across from Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) and Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.), the Republican and Democratic co-chairs of the House Problem Solvers Caucus, to present something increasingly unusual in our politics: unanimous Points of Agreement on immigration developed through an earlier Common Ground Workshop.

Keep ReadingShow less