Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Ranked-choice voting wins first Democracy Madness regional title

Democracy and basketball
danielfela/Getty Images

Ranked-choice voting kept its blow-out streak alive, besting calls for a new Voting Rights Act in the first Democracy Madness regional championship. RCV won by 29 points, making it the winner of the Voting bracket. It is the first of four democracy reform tactics that will compete in the Final Four in May.


RCV is an alternate voting method that allows voters to rank their preferred candidates and keeps whittling down the option through an instant runoff until one person has a majority of votes. It has been a darling of election reformers in recent years and rose to prominence following a 2016 referendum win in Maine, when voters approved RCV for all state and federal primary elections and general elections for Congress.

In 2018, voters overturned a legislative repeal and last year the Legislature extended the system to apply to the presidential election this fall and to the presidential primaries in four years.

Additionally, 18 cities have adopted RCV while others like New York City have passed legislation that will allow them to start using the alternate voting method in the future. In San Diego, the City Council is currently considering whether to add a ranked-choice voting measure to the November ballot — giving voters the opportunity to use RCV starting in 2022.

The alternative in this final was updating the Voting Rights Act, seen as essential to reversing the recent wave of laws that have suppressed the vote.

For five decades, places with histories of election discrimination had to get federal permission (called "preclearance") before changing any voting rules. That ended in 2013, when the Supreme Court struck down the formula deciding which states were covered. The Democratic House has passed a bill updating the formula but the GOP Senate has made clear it's not going anywhere.

RCV had to fend off the No. 3 seed, voting-at-home, in the regional semi-finals. Since the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic, expanding absentee balloting has become the dominant effort within the democracy reform movement. But ranked-choice voting won convincingly to advance to the finals.

The next region, focused on other structural changes to elections, kicks off Monday.


Read More

Business meeting, blurred background and people in office for teamwork, collaboration and planning

Another recruitment drive won’t fix a nonprofit board. A practical guide to sharing real decision-making power with diverse members: acknowledge, affirm, act.

Jacob Wackerhausen/Getty Images

Before Recruiting Diverse Board Members, Examine Who Holds Power

Nonprofit leaders keep asking me where they will find the next generation of diverse board talent. My question is what those leaders will be allowed to change once they arrive. In this piece, I outline concrete steps boards can take to ensure diverse members have real opportunities to shape organizational decision-making and to translate good intentions into meaningful progress.

In my board service and consulting work, I hear the concern from executives and grassroots activists alike. They worry about recruiting successors, sustaining funding, and governing organizations whose work increasingly depends on partnerships beyond their own walls. I share those concerns. I also wonder whether another recruitment initiative will solve what troubles them.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

jimfeng/Getty Images

Pennsylvania’s Bipartisan Exchange Is Rebuilding Trust in Governance

The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics has nearly 40 years of experience working with legislators from different political parties, and it is building on this history by drawing on lessons from the successful American Congressional Exchange model, begun in 2018 at the Bipartisan Policy Center, and from state exchanges now underway in Minnesota and Michigan. The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics, in collaboration with the Bridge Alliance, has launched the Pennsylvania Legislative Exchange.

This state-based, systematic approach is designed to foster better relationships and build trust across the political aisle with the following guiding principles:

Keep ReadingShow less
Shadow on a wall of Judge hitting gavel in court, concept of justice, law, and legal protection

DOJ lawsuits in Alaska and California preview post-Election Day fights over certification and seating winners. Here’s how officials and voters can prepare.

Aitor Diago / Getty Images

The Lawsuits Will Lose. The Delays Will Still Win.

Less than two weeks before Election Day, President Trump’s Justice Department asked a federal court to stop Alaska from certifying its U.S. Senate race if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses to Democrat Mary Peltola. The lawsuit claims that a second candidate on the ballot, Daniel J. Sullivan, will confuse voters. That argument went nowhere in June, when the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that the state had no legal way to remove him from the ballot. Asked about the suit, the president took credit. “I’m the one that said do it,” he told reporters.

Alongside the Alaska suit, the Trump administration sued California to keep the state from counting mail ballots from 20,000 people it calls “likely” noncitizens. Over the summer, the Department of Homeland Security put that number at 190,000. Legal experts expect both suits to fail, as so many suits like them have. Still, Alaska and California give us an early look at what the weeks after November 3rd could bring: recount demands, calls to review or throw out ballots, and pressure to delay seating winners.

Keep ReadingShow less