Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

New Jersey will vote on keeping gerrymandered map for two extra years

New Jersey statehouse

Democrats would be assured of dominating Trenton for another term if the referendum is OKd.

KenKPhoto/Getty Images

Voters will decide in November whether the next redrawing of New Jersey's legislative districts may be postponed for two years.

It will be one of the more unusual referendums addressing partisan gerrymandering — and yet another wrinkle in the running of democracy wrought by the coronavirus.

Democrats who control the Legislature say keeping current districts in place until 2023 is the fairest thing to do if population reports from the Census Bureau are delayed, which looks likely because of the complications of counting heads in a pandemic. That's a subterfuge for holding on to their seats for an extra term, Republicans complain, while good-government groups say the postponement would deny growing minority populations more influence in Trenton.


Legislators concluded the only way to get what they want was to ask the people to amend the state Constitution. The measure to put the language on the Nov. 3 ballot was cleared Thursday.

The timetable is unusually tight in New Jersey, because it's one of just two states that have legislative elections in 2021. (The other is Virginia, which will vote this fall on whether to assign redistricting to an independent panel, with its deadline for producing new maps not yet certain.)

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

If voters approve the measure, next year New Jersey will elect 120 legislators in the districts used since 2011 — assuming the census numbers are delivered after the middle of February. (Typically, the detailed data set is delivered by early March.) Lawmakers say this will provide the time needed to come up with fresh maps.

But that deadline is way too early, says the Princeton Gerrymandering Project, one of the groups opposed to the measure.

It would be possible to redraw the districts later and then delay the primary, which is usually in June, although maps drawn in the summer wouldn't leave much time to campaign in new territory for primaries in the early fall. Only a decade ago, when census results were late, the state responded by delaying the primary three weeks.

"This measure is unnecessary and it's extreme," said Republican state Sen. Kip Bateman. "It's not about fairness or accuracy. It's about protecting incumbents and the majority party's two decades of control in the Legislature."

The Princeton group maintains that pushing back an election is better than delaying redistricting because the latter would mean diluted voting power for the state's Latino and Asian-American communities, which have grown a combined 20 percent — more than 400,000 people — over the last decade, enough to become players in electing more state senators and House members.

The state's 12 congressional districts are redrawn using a separate process that won't be affected by this measure, and don't need to be remade as quickly in any case.

New Jersey is one of eight states that use independent redistricting commissions to draw new maps each decade for both Congress and the state legislature. Six other states do so for just the legislature.

Read More

MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

A check mark and hands.

Photo by Allison Saeng on Unsplash. Unsplash+ License obtained by the author.

MERGER: The Organization that Brought Ranked Choice Voting and Ended SuperPACs in Maine Joins California’s Nonpartisan Primary Pioneers

Originally published by Independent Voter News.

Today, I am proud to share an exciting milestone in my journey as an advocate for democracy and electoral reform.

Keep ReadingShow less
Half-Baked Alaska

A photo of multiple checked boxes.

Getty Images / Thanakorn Lappattaranan

Half-Baked Alaska

This past year’s elections saw a number of state ballot initiatives of great national interest, which proposed the adoption of two “unusual” election systems for state and federal offices. Pairing open nonpartisan primaries with a general election using ranked choice voting, these reforms were rejected by the citizens of Colorado, Idaho, and Nevada. The citizens of Alaska, however, who were the first to adopt this dual system in 2020, narrowly confirmed their choice after an attempt to repeal it in November.

Ranked choice voting, used in Alaska’s general elections, allows voters to rank their candidate choices on their ballot and then has multiple rounds of voting until one candidate emerges with a majority of the final vote and is declared the winner. This more representative result is guaranteed because in each round the weakest candidate is dropped, and the votes of that candidate’s supporters automatically transfer to their next highest choice. Alaska thereby became the second state after Maine to use ranked choice voting for its state and federal elections, and both have had great success in their use.

Keep ReadingShow less
Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

The United States Supreme Court.

Getty Images / Rudy Sulgan

Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

Fourteen years ago, after the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the popular blanket primary system, Californians voted to replace the deeply unpopular closed primary that replaced it with a top-two system. Since then, Democratic Party insiders, Republican Party insiders, minor political parties, and many national reform and good government groups, have tried (and failed) to deep-six the system because the public overwhelmingly supports it (over 60% every year it’s polled).

Now, three minor political parties, who opposed the reform from the start and have unsuccessfully sued previously, are once again trying to overturn it. The Peace and Freedom Party, the Green Party, and the Libertarian Party have teamed up to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Their brief repeats the same argument that the courts have previously rejected—that the top-two system discriminates against parties and deprives voters of choice by not guaranteeing every party a place on the November ballot.

Keep ReadingShow less
Ranked Choice Voting May Be a Stepping Stone to Proportional Representation

Someone filling out a ballot.

Getty Images / Hill Street Studios

Ranked Choice Voting May Be a Stepping Stone to Proportional Representation

In the 2024 U.S. election, several states did not pass ballot initiatives to implement Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) despite strong majority support from voters under 65. Still, RCV was defended in Alaska, passed by a landslide in Washington, D.C., and has earned majority support in 31 straight pro-RCV city ballot measures. Still, some critics of RCV argue that it does not enhance and promote democratic principles as much as forms of proportional representation (PR), as commonly used throughout Europe and Latin America.

However, in the U.S. many people have not heard of PR. The question under consideration is whether implementing RCV serves as a stepping stone to PR by building public understanding and support for reforms that move away from winner-take-all systems. Utilizing a nationally representative sample of respondents (N=1000) on the 2022 Cooperative Election Survey (CES), results show that individuals who favor RCV often also know about and back PR. When comparing other types of electoral reforms, RCV uniquely transfers into support for PR, in ways that support for nonpartisan redistricting and the national popular vote do not. These findings can inspire efforts that demonstrate how RCV may facilitate the adoption of PR in the U.S.

Keep ReadingShow less