Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Independent voters want to be heard. Is anybody listening?

Opinion

Thornburgh is a former CEO of the Committee of Seventy and current chair of that organization’s Ballot PA campaign to repeal closed primaries in Pennsylvania. Opdycke is the president of Open Primaries.

The American electorate is more “anti-party” than at any time since Adams and Jefferson inaugurated America’s first major political feud. According to Gallup, independents now comprise 42 percent of all voters. In states that require party registration, 49 percent of young voters choose “no party affiliation” when they register. One in two veterans identifies as a political independent.

This trend is accelerating in red, blue and purple states. And independents are swinging national outcomes; Barack Obama, Donald Trump and Joe Biden all owe their victories to surges of support from independents. In Pennsylvania, for example, exit polls suggest that the votes of independents swung 15 percent from 2016 to 2020, from Trump +7 to Biden +8. That likely provided the margin of victory in each race.

Yet according to analyst Charlie Cook, fewer than 16 percent of congressional races will be competitive in November 2022, the winner having been decided in a primary. More than 40 percent of state legislators will run unopposed in 2022. In Pennsylvania 80 percent to 90 percent of all legislative races are essentially decided before voters cast a single ballot in November.

More uncertainty, an electorate ready to swing, and yet little general election competition. All the more reason we need to scrap closed partisan primaries and enact open primaries that let all voters participate. If the primaries are where the action is, let all voters vote.


The rise of independent voters is real, and it is challenging the playbooks of both parties.

Democrat Chloe Maxmin discussed this in a recent editorial for The New York Times. Maxim ran and won as a “Green New Deal” Democrat in a rural Maine district that voted overwhelmingly for Trump in 2016 and 2020. She did it by ignoring the advice of national Democratic consultants to double down on her base and instead actually talked to the thousands of independents who live in her district. “Over the past decade, many Democrats seem to have stopped trying to persuade people who disagreed with them, counting instead on demographic shifts they believed would carry them to victory — if only they could turn out their core supporters.”

The Democratic National Committee playbook (the one Maxim and her team threw in the garbage) ignores voters who are not party members. Instead, candidates run tired plays that use analytics and algorithms to find independents who look like Democrats and then market to them as if they are Democrats. They ignore the fact that millions of Americans are exhausted by the grim red team/blue team battles and are asserting “I don’t want to be a part of your party.” Ignoring that fact, most campaigns are still run and won as if it is 1952 and 90 percent of Americans are proud members of one party or the other.

The Republicans play a different version of head-in-the sand politics. They trot out tired tropes about socialism and the culture monster under the bed to whip up their base. New American Voices co-founder Minh-Thu Pham described in The Washington Post what this looks like among first generation citizens, huge numbers of whom are registered as independents. “Armed with efficient ways to spread untruths, antidemocratic forces are taking advantage of immigrants who have limited access to reliable information in their primary languages and are prone to being swayed by narratives that inflame underlying fears based on homeland politics.”

One party takes independents for granted, and the other manipulates fears and misconceptions. Add to that closed primaries, and you have a recipe for a toxic stew of massive voter discontent and disenfranchisement.

At some point, political consultants will reconsider these tired tactics and adopt a more inclusive and creative approach towards independent voters. But to accelerate that move in the short term, it’s past time to repeal closed primaries, which bar independents from casting a ballot in round one, the only round that matters. That's what we're aiming to do in Pennsylvania right now.

Ballot PA is our campaign to repeal closed primaries in Pennsylvania. We’ve built a broad coalition of veterans, business groups, young voters, Democratic and Republican legislative allies, and bill sponsors. Steelers great Rocky Bleier and two former party chairs serve as our statewide spokespeople. Even 74 percent of hard-core partisan voters support the idea, and virtually every media outlet in the state has endorsed the proposal. We’re hoping to follow the lead of states like Maine and Colorado, which share our pragmatic approach to politics and have ended closed primaries in the last few years. We're not the only ones, as leaders in a dozen other states are looking seriously at options for primary reform.

As our two former party chairs point out, when parties give up their extra-constitutional control of voters and open the door to independents, it can actually work to their advantage. Ending closed primaries can help either party win elections and grow their ranks. More independent voters create more party paths to victory in the primary and the general election. Voters wary of being conscripted into a party just to cast a vote that matters will appreciate the “try before you buy” opportunity an open primary affords them.

But it’s only one step. Yes, we need to repeal every law that prevents all voters from voting in every election. But we also need candidates and political leaders who have the vision to see the opportunity independent voters offer them, not only to win but to govern. We need fresh party leaders who are ready, willing and able to break with tired partisan norms and engage with “free agent” voters – independents – who don’t subscribe to either party’s playbook.


Read More

ball under basketball ring
ball under basketball ring
Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

Fairness and Inclusion in Women’s Sports

Two former NBA players have said they want to play in the Women’s National Basketball Association (WNBA). Enes Kanter Freedom and Royce White announced their intent to enter the WNBA draft, claiming—falsely—that they identify as women to force the WNBA to clarify its policy, which restricts participation to women without defining what it means to be a woman. The players’ announcement followed closely on the heels of WNBA player Sophie Cunningham’s public comments that it was “common sense” that only “biological women” be permitted to compete in the WNBA. Cunningham’s comments drew competing rallies to her games, either supporting or denouncing her stance. Her statement was preceded by the first Supreme Court ruling on eligibility for female sports competitions at the school and college level, a ruling that does not apply to professional sports. In West Virginia v. B. P. J., the Supreme Court affirmed that U.S. states may legally bar transgender girls and women from female school or collegiate sports teams, leaving states to decide.

Public discussion of this issue has been deeply polarized. Some on the political left have asserted that “trans women are women” and that anyone who opposes their participation in elite women’s sports is a bigot. Meanwhile, some on the political right have presented trans women athletes as male athletes stealing women’s trophies. This is a classic case of affective polarization—a phenomenon in which people feel their identities, values, or rights are at stake. They become less willing to consider alternative perspectives and demonize those with opposing views.

Keep ReadingShow less
 In an aerial view, the Stargate Oracle AI data center campus.

In an aerial view, the Stargate Oracle AI data center campus is seen on August 26, 2026 in Abilene, Texas

Brandon Bell/Getty Images

Is AI Worth the Cost to Communities?

Picture a family living on a quiet street in an idyllic small town. Then a data center moves in next door. Trees are knocked down for a sprawling industrial campus, an enormous windowless building rises, and a maddening hum continues day and night. The family closes its windows, abandons the backyard, and struggles to sleep. Open space disappears, electric bills rise, and the company announces plans to expand—all in the name of jobs, tax revenue, and so-called progress.

While the family is fictional, its experience is not. Across the country, communities are confronting noise, rising electricity demand, water consumption, lost open space, and data centers approved with little public discussion. These costs raise a question the technology industry would rather avoid: Are the promised benefits of the artificial-intelligence boom worth what communities are being asked to sacrifice?

Keep ReadingShow less
Judge's hand holding wooden hammer

A lawyer breaks down 'rule of law' using everyday analogies—sports, board games—to explain why recent government actions threaten this founding principle.

naruecha jenthaisong/Getty Images

The Rule of Law Is Simple—and Essential to American Democracy

This series from Lawyers Defending American Democracy connects the words of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution to current events that threaten democracy and the justice system. Each piece highlights the unique responsibility lawyers carry—through their oath, professional obligations, and roles in their communities—to help the public understand what’s at risk and to speak out when democratic principles are under threat. LDAD’s call to action is straightforward: as the Founders once did, we must recognize threats to constitutional values, demand accountability, and act to defend them.

Before the first No Kings rally last year, I carefully hand-lettered a sign that I thought perfectly encapsulated the day's theme. On one side, it read “IN THIS COUNTRY, THE RULE OF LAW IS KING." On the other, it read, "A GOVERNMENT OF LAWS, NOT OF MEN (John Adams)." I carried my sign proudly, certain that it would be a big hit. But the only reaction I got was someone asking me, “Are you a lawyer?” I wonder what gave me away.

Keep ReadingShow less
Texas City, Galveston County, industrial skyline.

Texas City, Galveston County, industrial skyline. While still battling legal challenges over a map in 2021 that voting rights advocates said diluted the voting power of Black and Latino voters, Galveston County has now redrawn its precinct lines again, just months before the 2026 general election.

Getty Images

What We Know About Galveston County’s Redistricting and What It Means for Voters

Galveston County’s decision to redraw local precinct lines this year between the primary and general elections means some voters could cast general election ballots in contests where they had no say in the primary, unless the courts intervene.

Election experts say they’re not aware of any prior instance where this has happened. Galveston County’s latest round of changes is adding new complications to a long-running lawsuit over the maps the county had adopted in 2021, and voting rights advocates say the new maps could further dilute Black and Latino voting power in the county.

Keep ReadingShow less