Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Revamp of San Diego elections dies despite broad reform group push

San Diego, Calif.
David Toussaint/Getty Images

Griffiths is the editor of Independent Voter News, where a version of this story first appeared.

An election overhaul in the nation's eight largest city, designed to expand voters' viable choices and minimize polarization, has been killed by the San Diego City Council.

A broad coalition of democracy reform advocacy groups had made it a top priority to get a referendum revamping the municipal voting process on the November ballot, viewing the city as receptive to the plan. But the proposal was blocked Tuesday by the council on a 5-4 vote.

If adopted, San Diego would have replaced traditional partisan primaries for each office with a single contest open to all candidates, with the top four finishers advancing to a November election decided by ranked-choice voting.


"I want to tip my hat to the remarkable coalition that came together in support of change, and the heartfelt expressions of support of so many people seeking better elections in San Diego," said Rob Richie, who runs FairVote, which advocates for ranked elections. "That commitment will result in change in the future."

The advocates took some solace that their proposal secured bipartisan support. It was backed by two Democrats, a Republican and an independent. Four Democrats and a Republican formed the majority.

Local party leaders and partisan special interests teamed up to oppose the measure.

"From Maine to Alaska, nonpartisan reformers have had to battle the combined opposition of those in control of both major political parties," said Cara Brown McCormick, who has run two successful RCV campaigns in Maine and pressed the proposal in California. "The fact that some elected officials would refuse to give the people of San Diego a chance to vote on this measure tells you everything you need to know about why we need this reform so badly."

The proposal was brought forward by an unusually broad coalition spanning the ideological spectrum, including the League of Women Voters of San Diego, FairVote, RepresentUs, Take Back Our Republic, The Partnership for the Advancement of New Americans, Business for America, The People, Open Primaries, Community Advocates for a Just and Moral Governance, Indivisible and the Independent Voter Project.

The system, known as "Top4RCV," has emerged as a consensus favorite among nonpartisan election reformers across the country. A similar proposal will be on the ballot this fall in Alaska and is gathering preliminary support in states as diverse as Wisconsin and Arkansas.

Lori Thiel, president of the city's League of Women Voters chapter, described the vote as a missed opportunity to elect "representatives with the broadest base of support, ensuring they're responsible to the most constituents."

"The measure would have resulted in better representation and a more diverse field of candidates," lamented Geneviéve Jones-Wright of Community Advocates for Just and Moral Governance. "The measure would have helped us have a more inclusive democracy."

Advocates are confident that the candidates who win under the proposed system would have the broadest appeal and would campaign in nonpolarizing ways in order to turn off the fewest number of voters.

"We are very confident that this common-sense method of voting for candidates will gain more support as the word continues to spread around the community, " said Francis Johnson, chairman of Take Back Our Republic's board. "This is a temporary setback."

Visit IVN.us for more coverage from Independent Voter News.


Read More

An illustration of the U.S. flag on the shape of the U.S. with blue and red figures of people across it.

Every state has its own constitution.

How State Constitutions Became the Battleground for American Rights and Liberties – on Both the Left and Right

Beyond picking governors, state legislators, local officials and representatives to serve in Congress, voters in almost every state this year will have the opportunity to amend the language of their state constitution. In one state, they could potentially rewrite the constitution altogether.

Though the U.S. Constitution is rarely amended, voters frequently amend their state constitutions. In every election cycle, voters are asked to ratify constitutional amendments.

Keep ReadingShow less
Protestors holding signs at a rally, one reads, "Trump is not above the law."

Protesters gather at a Nobody Is Above the Law rally protesting President Trump's interference in the Mueller investigation on November 08, 2018 in Washington, DC.

Larry French/Getty Images

The Double Standard Presidency: When We Watch Leaders Act Above the Law

Americans are told that no one is above the law. Yet every day, they watch a president behave in ways that would get any ordinary citizen fired, disciplined, confronted, or held accountable — and they watch some Americans excuse it. What makes this moment even more striking is that critics across the political spectrum, including conservatives, now warn that the presidency is operating on a dangerous double standard. This is not a partisan concern. It is a constitutional one. And it is tearing at the fabric of our democracy.

For generations, the Constitution has provided guardrails — separation of powers, checks and balances, oversight mechanisms, and limits on executive authority — designed to prevent any leader from functioning above the law. The framers feared concentrated power more than anything else. They believed that the presidency must be constrained not only by written law but by norms of restraint, dignity, and respect for institutions. Those norms held for centuries because presidents understood that the office was larger than any individual, and Congress understood that oversight was not optional.

Keep ReadingShow less
Study Reveals Sharp Generational Divide in How Latino Identity Influences Daily Life

Study Reveals Sharp Generational Divide in How Latino Identity Influences Daily Life

Latino immigrants and U.S.-born Latinos differ sharply in how much their identity shapes their daily lives, according to recent findings from the Pew Research Center’s 2025 National Survey of Latinos. The survey shows that Latino immigrants are far more likely than U.S.-born Latinos to say their identity is central to who they are, and that it influences their experiences in the United States. Pew researchers Gabriel Piña, Mark Hugo Lopez, Sahana Mukherjee, Dalia Fahmy, and Alexandra Cahn report that the divide reflects differences in cultural connection, lived experience, and generational distance from immigrant roots.

Pew’s analysis finds that Latino immigrants are significantly more likely to say their origins are central to their identity, while U.S.-born Latinos — especially those in the third generation or higher — are less likely to feel that connection. The report notes that “U.S. Hispanics are divided on whether their identity helps or hurts them in America,” with some respondents describing their Latino identity as a source of pride and connection, and others saying it is tied to discrimination or barriers.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Democracy Cannot Run on an AI Model

Clerk Matthew Sandbar, 34, demonstrates part of the ballot-sorting process to members of the media attending a walkthrough of the Philadelphia Ballot Processing Center used to process the ballots of the 2022 US midterm elections, in Philadelphia on October 27, 2022.

Photo by Ryan Collerd / AFP via Getty Images

A Democracy Cannot Run on an AI Model

Tallying the results of Washington, DC’s first ranked-choice election in June took about 10 days—longer than many voters are used to. In an age when artificial intelligence can generate an answer in seconds, waiting days for election results can feel old-fashioned, inefficient, even suspicious. And it is about to matter far more widely. This November, 17 states, cities, and counties will use ranked-choice voting, including Maine and Alaska statewide, in races that could help decide control of Congress. More voters than ever will watch results take days to resolve, and more will be asked to trust a count they cannot see.

But that slowness may be one of its most democratic features.

Keep ReadingShow less