Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Debut of ranked voting for president survives in Maine

Maine lighthouse

Maine is at the forefront of efforts to make ranked voting the national norm. The GOP is fighting that.

Kenneth C. Zirkel/Getty Images

Maine will be the first state to use ranked-choice voting in a presidential election, because the Republican Party's attempt to block the alternative voting method has failed.

Secretary of State Matt Dunlap announced Wednesday that a petition drive to block the use of RCV for president this fall had come up 2,000 signatures short of the 63,000 ultimately required.

That amounts to a significant symbolic victory for those who view ranking elections as one of the best ways to bolster democracy, because the system tends to reduce partisan polarization and reward centrist candidates. Mainers have been in the vanguard of the effort to expand use of RCV, adopting it for virtually all contests four years ago and implementing it statewide in 2018, despite a handful of legal and legislative challenges.


Last month, when ballot petitions were due for submission, the state Republican Party reported it had collected 72,000 signatures. But state officials tossed 11,000 of them because they were not properly certified by the registrar or were duplicative.

But Maine GOP Chairwoman Demi Kouzounas said the fight is not over. "It is abundantly clear" that the secretary of state, a Democrat, "used every trick in the book to throw out enough signatures through a litany of technicalities to keep this question off the ballot," Kouzounas said.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Sufficient signatures would have ordered a referendum in November on whether to use ranked voting in future presidential contests — and suspended the use of the system this time.

Under RCV, voters rank as many candidates for each office as they like in order of preference. If no one is ranked on top of most ballots, the person with the fewest No. 1 votes is eliminated and those ballots are redistributed to the second-choice candidates. That process repeats in a series of "instant runoffs" until one candidates breaks the 50 percent threshold.

Had the petition drive succeeded, the state's four electoral votes would have been awarded to either President Trump or former Vice President Joe Biden — even if neither has majority support, and without regard to whom supporters of third-party candidates would prefer as a backup.

Republican opposition to RCV has only grown as the voting method has gained more traction across the country. Conservatives were particularly up in arms about it two years ago, after GOP incumbent Bruce Poliquin lost in Maine's 2nd congressional district to Democrat Jared Golden.

Tuesday's three-way GOP primary to nominate Golden's opponent is now in limbo until election officials redistribute the 23 percent of ballots where the last-place finisher was the top choice.

The system's likeliest impact on the presidential race is in that same district. For the past half-century Maine has been unusual in awarding one electoral vote to the winner of each House district and two votes to the statewide victor. Biden can probably count on three votes, but Trump has a shot in the 2nd District (he won it four years ago) if no instant runoff is required.

RCV could also shape the tossup Senate race between GOP incumbent Susan Collins and her Democratic challenger, state House Speaker Sara Gideon.

Read More

People holding signs against Project 2025 and Donald Trump

Protestors rally against Project 2025 and Donald Trump in New York's Times Square.

Selcuk Acar/Anadolu via Getty Images

Project 2025: How anti-trans proposals could impact all families

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

Willie Carver has been a teacher in Kentucky since 2007, now working with college students. For over two years, he has worked with the American Federation of Teachers’ National LGBTQ+ Task Force, an advocacy arm of the influential labor union created to counter the rise and repression brought by anti-LGBTQ+ laws.

One of the country’s most draconian anti-trans measures became law in Carver’s home state last March. The law has required teachers to put politics before the wellbeing of their own students and reshaped how students see and treat each other. It bans them from being taught about gender identity or sexual orientation, using restrooms and locker rooms that match their gender identity and learning about human sexuality. The law also made gender-affirming care illegal for trans youth.

Keep ReadingShow less
Perston holding a sign that reads "Project 2025 is Christian nationalism"

Opponents of Project 2025 hold a rally at Times Square on July 27.

Selcuk Acar/Anadolu via Getty Images

Project 2025: A blueprint for Christian nationalist regime change

Casey is a former editorial writer for The New York Times and has worked with the Kettering Foundation since 2010.

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross-partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 is a “presidential transition project” created as a blueprint for recruitment and indoctrination should Donald Trump become the next president. The plan calls for establishing a government that would be imbued with “biblical principles” and run by a president who holds sweeping executive powers.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump at a podium

Former President Donald Trump's campaign exploits racist dog whistles, demonizing immigrants and endorsing white nationalist rhetoric, writes Johnson.

Adam J. Dewey/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Contending with whiteness in 2024

Johnson is a United Methodist pastor, the author of "Holding Up Your Corner: Talking About Race in Your Community" and program director for the Bridge Alliance, which houses The Fulcrum.

The 2024 presidential campaign is shaping to be a racial reckoning for America.

With Vice President Kamala Harris positioned to shatter the glass ceiling as the first woman and person of color in the Oval Office and Donald Trump's candidacy fanning the flames of racial hatred, the election is laying bare the nation's ongoing struggle with whiteness and racial justice. As a pastor and advocate for racial reconciliation, I believe this moment will test our democracy's commitment to liberty and justice for all.

Keep ReadingShow less
Kamala Harris and Donald Trump

Kamala Harris and Donald Trump

Jacek Boczarski/Anadolu, Andrew Leyden/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Where Harris, Trump stand on issues is less important than you think

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

Candidates for president of the United States typically run for office as though they were running for prime minister in a parliamentary democracy where their own party would have a clear majority in parliament. In such systems, which make up the vast majority of democracies in the world, the prime minister has enormous power to set policy.

In the United States, you would think that presidents are prime ministers because they always talk about what "I" will do as president based on where "I" stand on a great range of issues. While the president admittedly has much more power to set foreign policy, all major domestic policies must be passed by Congress. Indeed, Congress makes laws, while the president and the Cabinet execute them.

Keep ReadingShow less
Young man looking angry at display of his smartphone.

The inflammatory rhetoric, meaningless speculation and lack of fact checking by the media may result in young adults rejecting traditional platforms in favor of their well-being.

urbazon/Getty Images

By focusing on outrage, the media risks alienating younger audiences

Rikleen is executive director of Lawyers Defending American Democracy and the editor of “Her Honor – Stories of Challenge and Triumph from Women Judges.” Beougher is a junior at Amherst College and a co-founder ofStudents Strengthening American Democracy.

As attacks on democracy and the rule of law continually increase, much of the media refuses to address its role in intensifying the peril.

Instead of asking hard questions and insisting on answers, traditional media outlets increasingly trade news and facts for speculative commentary that ignores a story’s contextual significance. At the same time, social media outlets and influencers stoke anger as an alternative to thoughtfulness.

Keep ReadingShow less