Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Want young people to vote in NY? Open the primaries.

Want young people to vote in NY? Open the primaries.
Getty Images

Roggenkamp is a junior at SUNY Oneonta and an Ambassador for Students for Open Primaries, a nonprofit dedicated to enfranchising young voters.

As a young voter, I’ve asked myself, “how can I use my voice in a big way?” My first thought was to go out and vote, but when I showed up to the last primary election I was turned away. That’s because while I’m a registered voter, I’m one of over three million independent voters in New York that are barred from voting in the primaries.


I thought back to a time when my Nana, who was born of Italian immigrants in 1928, was beyond proud to be an American. I recently found old newspaper clippings from when she was young, interviewed on the street by local newspapers on the topic of American politics. For her, being a woman with the right to vote was something she was proud of. Those memories had me question, why don’t voters have the same feeling of empowerment in elections today?

I always vote, but I never understood primary elections until recently. Primary elections are crucial to our electoral outcomes because they determine which representatives have a better standing in the general election.

The current system suppresses the voices of independents-derogatorily labeled “other” and “blank” on the New York voter rolls who are told to pick a side. Well, I’m here to tell you that young people, millennials and Gen Z alike, are registering as independents in record numbers- over 50 percent- and we don’t want to pick a side. Why should we be forced to join a private political party in order to vote?

In America, our motto is “United We Stand” because divided we fall, and I believe firmly in unity, freedom, and equality for all. This country is not just Red or Blue, but instead, there are voices that share independent or bipartisan beliefs, and those voices slip between the cracks and become lost along the way during primary elections.

We often forget just how many Americans are independent today. New data from Gallup shows that over 49 percent of Americans today consider themselves to be independent voters. Often these unconventional voices are looked upon negatively by partisans. However, people deserve the right to vote. Since New York is a closed primary state, citizens registered as independent or with no political party do not get to vote during primary elections, locking millions out of the democratic process.

New York is one of twelve states that still uses a closed primary system, and it needs to change. In 2023, more and more New Yorkers no longer identify with a political party, and both political parties in New York have lost voters in the last year and over the last decade. Voters who have chosen not to affiliate with any political party have grown by 22 percent.

There are many arguments on how open primaries would affect the nomination process, but the bigger picture is to stray from the extremes. We need to provide more opportunity and lift the veil to incentivize more voters to have their right to vote in primary elections in New York. Recent studies have found that open primaries significantly increase voter turnout. If our voices are heard and communities feel more understood, there will be a greater and more positive impact for all.

Opening primaries in New York has nothing to do with advancing one side over another but rather the opportunity to include every New Yorker in our most basic right as citizens— voting. As an American, I want the right to choose leaders that align with my beliefs. I am passionate about this issue because of my own experience of being turned away at the polls. I choose to speak up and I refuse to give up my democratic rights- something my late grandma would have frowned upon. The choice is ours in making greater impacts and it starts by reforming how we elect our public officials.

It’s time to open the primaries in New York.


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