Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Opening primaries is a necessary first step toward bigger reforms

Opinion

"I voted" stickers
Jeremy Hogan/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images
Frazier, a student at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, runs The Oregon Way, a nonpartisan blog.

If there were a silver bullet for democratic reform, you think we would have found it by now. With countries around the world experimenting with various forms of democracy for decades, if not centuries, surely we would have unlocked the cheat code to a representative and responsive government. Instead, democracy is in constant flux and in need of perpetual reform because the rest of the world is as well — technology jumps, the economy shifts and people move. Democracy, though, can and must still progress. And, thankfully, it has. That progress has been through the steady adoption of reforms that make bolder steps possible down the road.

The issue is that democratic reformers like to think in leaps, rather than steps. In the rush to make progress, sometimes reformers champion their partial solution to the detriment of solving the larger problem. The biggest advocates of plastic straw bans of course care more about fighting climate change rather than how people slurp. But, in putting their solution ahead of the problem, these advocates were left flatfooted when an unanticipated issue occurred: climate skeptics responding so strongly to this small change that they became even less likely to support larger, more necessary reforms to our climate crisis.

Regardless of which straws you use, you have surely noticed the lack of competition in our elections. It's a problem with no single solution. As a result, reform camps have formed — each fiercely defensive of their idea being the best path forward, regardless of whether it's a leap or step. There are the campaign finance reform folks. And the term limit fanatics. And the crusaders for their preferred version of voting reform.

Among these various electoral reform ideas, one small step has emerged that, if implemented, can make future leaps possible. That small step is open primaries. The incremental step of simply making all candidates compete in one primary that's open to all parties will not immediately revive our democracy. However, open primaries can open the door to enough progress that a domino of reforms can be triggered.

Open primaries should be prioritized because they can engage a group of voters that's essential to all later reforms: independents. These voters form an increasingly larger share of our electorate yet, in many states, are denied full participatory rights as partisan voters.

Open primaries can fix this issue by giving every voter the same stake in the future of our democracy. With that sense of empowerment, these voters will become more likely to back future democratic improvements. Voting has long been identified as an entryway to political engagement. In the electoral reform space, open primaries represent the simplest path to this basic level of inclusion. Other reforms may do this as well but typically involve other changes that may diminish the likelihood of popular adoption.

It's the simplicity of open primaries that makes this reform a necessary step, rather than a long-term endpoint. In other words, an open primary system — by inviting independent voters into our democracy and reform movements — is the horse that can bring a cart of electoral reforms into the realm of possibility.

A common fear among reformers is that you only get one bite at the reform apple — as if the perpetual engine of democratic innovation will suddenly stall. That's never been the case nor will it be. Our world is too chaotic to think that voters will ever tire of imagining new ways to make our democracy better. Open primaries form the sort of simple step forward that can lead to bigger changes, which is why broad support for this solution is so important.


Read More

​Border patrol SUV

Border patrol SUV at the Mexico / United States border in El Paso Texas

Getty Images

How Border Policies Are Reshaping South Texas Politics

Zapata County, a rural border region in South Texas, is one of the poorest counties in the state. Democratic presidential candidates carried the county for more than a century. In 2020, that all changed when Zapata, a county with a population that is 94 percent Latino, voted for Donald Trump. Trump won the county again in 2024.

Less than two years after Trump took office for a second time, the administration’s border policies are weighing on Zapata residents. The federal government began bulldozing land across the county in June. Landowners are beginning to fight back and some say their private property has been seized illegally to build the wall.

Keep ReadingShow less
Georgia State Capitol

Georgia State Capitol in downtown Atlanta Georgia USA.

Getty Images

The Governor Count Will Miss the Biggest Statehouse Changes

A Democratic victory in Georgia and a Democratic victory in Nevada would add the same number to the party’s governor tally. If current legislative majorities survived, however, the results would change state government in opposite ways. Georgia would acquire an executive able to challenge Republican control. Nevada would acquire unified Democratic government. One result creates a new bargaining obstacle; the other removes one.

That difference should shape how Americans interpret the 36 governorships on the ballot this November. Election-night coverage will count partisan gains and losses. The more useful question for public managers and citizens is which combinations of authority those results create, and who will then possess enough power to be held responsible for delivery.

Keep ReadingShow less
A montage of dollars and yuans
assorted banknotes
Photo by Eric Prouzet on Unsplash

America’s Political Whiplash Is the World’s Problem

The rest of the world is beginning to hedge against the United States.

The New York Times recently reported that global investors are balking at U.S. bonds and that foreign governments are pulling their gold out of American vaults. This month the Dutch central bank moved much of its North American gold out of the United States. In March the Bank of France took 129 tons out of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, the largest in the world, plans to cut its holdings of Treasuries. Last year Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank, said erratic policymaking in the United States was setting the stage for a “global euro moment.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A ​fire burns and destroys the city hall  in Limoges, central France.

A fire burns and destroys the city hall after a group of individuals forced entry into the building during ongoing protest action against the "high cost of living," in Limoges, central France on Oct. 17, 2026.

Pascal Lachenaud/AFP/Getty Images/Tribune

What Americans can learn from the French protests

On Monday, France’s Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez admitted that police have “lost control” as some cities continue to see massive waves of looting and mayhem. Social media brims with images of stores being ransacked, cars burning, and mask-wearing goons running wild. In Limoges, the beautiful Hôtel de Ville was burnt to the ground.

But the chaos, as is so often the case, began peacefully. And many supporters and leaders of the protests have condemned the violence. I think that violence has more to do with France’s miserable record of assimilating immigrants from North Africa and the Middle East than with budget cuts. Call me cynical, but I don’t believe the goons pillaging Louis Vuitton stores are planning to resell the handbags to buy better school supplies or to bolster their teachers’ salaries.

Keep ReadingShow less