Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Welcome to Brash Tacks​

There’s magic in an open primary system

Opinion

Former Phoenix Mayor Paul Johnson

Former Phoenix Mayor Paul Johnson is working to bring nonpartisan open primaries to Arizona.

John Opdycke is the founder and president of Open Primaries, a national advocacy organization working to enact and protect open and nonpartisan primaries and enhance the visibility and power of independent voters. This monthly column will offer John’s insights about how a people-powered, non-ideological democracy movement can be most effective in revamping our political process and culture to meet the needs of a complex and ever changing 21st century landscape.

“Oh and by the way, that’s the magical key to democracy. It’s talking to people you don’t necessarily agree with.” — Paul Johnson, former mayor of Phoenix

Welcome to Brash Tacks, a new monthly column I’m writing for The Fulcrum. Brash in that I will try my best to ruffle a few feathers and not to be predictable. Tacks in the nautical sense of navigating shifting winds. I’ve been an independent democracy activist for 30 years and have learned a bit about both.

My goal with this column is to offer notes about how a people-powered, non-ideological democracy movement can be most effective in revamping our political process and culture to meet the needs of a complex and ever changing 21st century landscape. Despite the best efforts of an increasingly unhinged partisan establishment to limit our growth and our impact, we are in a great position to punch above our weight in 2024. While the media will be obsessed with the presidential horse race (okay, most of us will be obsessed with the horse race) there are going to be so many opportunities to change the rules of the game in 2024. And changing the rules of the game has never been more important.


I had a great discussion last week with Paul Johnson, the former mayor of Phoenix. Paul is the co-founder of Save Democracy Arizona and Make Elections Fair Arizona, a left/center/right campaign to enact nonpartisan open primaries in Arizona via ballot referendum. Paul and his growing team have raised $5 million and are laser focused on gathering the 400,000-plus signatures they need to appear on the 2024 ballot. They are putting forth a bold and innovative policy that combines nonpartisan primaries for state and federal primaries with a “no more taxpayer funding for presidential primaries unless independents are allowed to participate” clause. It’s a very innovative approach.

Paul hosts a podcast called the Optimistic American – and that’s what he is. If you are ever feeling glum just listen to him for 15 minutes and you’ll want to hug your family, read up on Abraham Lincoln and start a business! He is also one of the most articulate spokespeople in the country for open primaries and responsive government. He’s so good because he’s run for office in a nonpartisan open system (Phoenix city council and mayor) and in a partisan system (governor of Arizona) and he knows intimately how the rules of the system impact how candidates campaign and how they govern. He’s a fan of open primaries because they force politicians to campaign to all the voters, not just their fellow partisans. That’s the magic of an open system, as opposed to the illusion of choice and participation in a closed system.

Watch our full conversation:

Can Arizona Lead the Way on Democratic Reform?www.youtube.com

Paul said two things in our discussion that really made me think. First, the way to mobilize and inspire Americans to vote “yes” on reform is to talk about values, not procedure. People respond strongly and positively when you talk about fairness, equality, a level playing field, inclusion, one set of rules for everyone – but they glaze over when you talk about technicalities. Second, why are so many Americans leaving the political parties, even liberals and conservatives who still believe in much of the parties’ platforms? Because people don’t want to be associated with a group, not in this era of “blame the other side for everything” toxic division and partisanship.

You know, Paul said, many independents look a lot like Democrats or Republicans. So why bother registering as an independent at all? Because they don’t want to be locked into a group. They want politicians to work for their vote and not take it for granted. They want agency. Independents feel strongly that the parties misuse their power and abuse the voters. They don’t want to join an organization that abuses and divides voters, even one that they agree with on many issues.

We all know the statistics: Forty-nine percent of Americans now identify as independents including 55 percent of young voters and 49 percent of veterans. But the statistics don’t tell the whole story. They don’t capture the motivations behind this expansion. Maybe the rise of political independence is an expression of support for the core American values of fairness and democracy as well as dissatisfaction with the way both major parties fail to protect those values.

We face some tough democracy battles in 2024. Partisan zealots are seeking to enact closed primaries in a dozen states and restrict the ability of citizens to use the referendum process in a dozen more. Reformers are advancing nonpartisan or open primaries in Nevada, Colorado, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Rhode Island, D.C., New Mexico, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Montana, New York City and Florida. All of us can learn something from Paul about how to make these campaigns as appealing as possible to the voters. Focus on the core values of fairness and inclusion. And connect with the growing desire voters have to be taken seriously as individuals. Collective values, individual agency. Sounds like magic to me.


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