Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The U.S. House of Representatives has a governing problem: Alaska has some answers

The U.S. House of Representatives has a governing problem: Alaska has some answers
Getty Images

Sherman is press director for Unite America, a philanthropic venture fund that invests in nonpartisan election reform to foster a more representative and functional government.

The U.S. House of Representatives has a governing problem. From a near-shutdown to an inability to elect a Speaker, these past several weeks have further exposed the polarizing incentives driven by America’s system of party primaries. In a narrowly-divided House, just a handful of representatives elected by a tiny fraction of the population in primaries have the power to cause chaos.


According to new research from the Unite America Institute, Alaska may provide some state-based solutions to this nationwide problem. The Alaska Model examines the impact of the state’s historic top-four nonpartisan primary on state politics and governance. Used for the first time in 2022, the new system gave Alaskans the most "meaningful votes" in the nation. The share of Alaskans casting meaningful votes increased by nearly 60% over 2020 to 35%, which is about three times the national average.

Unite America developed the meaningful votes metric to help the public understand how many voters cast ballots in competitive elections that are not effectively pre-determined based on party affiliation alone. For example, a voter casts a meaningful vote in a general election in a district where either party has a chance of winning, or in the case of Alaska, where there are two or more candidates from the same party.

Alaska’s top-four nonpartisan primary has also encouraged more cooperative governance. Following the 2022 elections, bipartisan majority coalitions formed in both the Alaska House and Senate. While bipartisan majority coalitions are not uncommon in the Alaska Legislature, it’s highly unusual for them to occur in both chambers at the same time. This kind of bipartisan coalition is unlikely to occur in the U.S. House because unlike Alaska, the vast majority of members have to win a partisan primary.

“Two simple but powerful things are now true about Alaska’s elections: Every eligible voter has the freedom to vote for any candidate in every taxpayer-funded election, and politicians have to win a majority to take office,” said Nick Troiano, executive director of Unite America and author of the forthcoming book The Primary Solution. “When lawmakers are elected by the majority of voters, they’re more likely to represent that majority. That’s true in Alaska, but clearly not in the U.S. House of Representatives.”

Here’s how Alaska’s top-four system works. All candidates, regardless of party, appear on a unified primary ballot. The top four finishers advance to the general election, which is decided by an instant runoff.

Because of that election system, the report finds, Alaskan elections saw a dramatic increase in competition. In 2022, the number of uncontested races dropped to 12%, the lowest in a decade. Additionally, about 30% of state legislative seats were won by less than 55% of the vote, nearly double the recent historical average.

Finally, Alaska’s top-four nonpartisan primary appears to mitigate political extremism, producing candidates that better represent the electorate. This is particularly evident when you look at the 2022 statewide results: In the same election, Alaska voters chose moderate Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski, moderate Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola, and conservative Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy. It’s likely that Murkowski and Peltola would have lost partisan primaries to more ideologically extreme opponents. But the majority of Alaskans supported them, so they won under the new system.

The Alaska Model is Unite America Institute’s third Solution Series report examining the impacts of nonpartisan primaries. Previous research looked at Louisiana, which abolished partisan primaries in the 1970s, and California, which implemented top-two nonpartisan primaries in 2012. Leading center-right think tank R Street recently published research on Washington’s top-two system.

While each state pursued a slightly different solution to the “Primary Problem,” the evidence shows that nonpartisan primaries give voters more meaningful participation, make elections more competitive, and yield more representative leaders.

“The findings of our Solutions Series are clear: Primary reform works,” said Troiano.

Complete details on “Alaska's Election Model: How the top-four nonpartisan primary system improves participation, competition, and representation” can be found at this report link.


Read More

Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses
black video camera
Photo by Matt C on Unsplash

Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses

This week, I joined a coalition of journalists in Washington, D.C., to speak directly with lawmakers about a crisis unfolding in plain sight: the rapid disappearance of local, community‑rooted journalism. The advocacy day, organized by the Hispanic Technology & Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP), brought together reporters and media leaders who understand that the future of local news is inseparable from the future of American democracy.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Keep ReadingShow less
People wearing vests with "ICE" and "Police" on the back.

The latest shutdown deal kept government open while exposing Congress’s reliance on procedural oversight rather than structural limits on ICE.

Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

A Shutdown Averted, and a Narrow Window Into Congress’s ICE Dilemma

Congress’s latest shutdown scare ended the way these episodes usually do: with a stopgap deal, a sigh of relief, and little sense that the underlying conflict had been resolved. But buried inside the agreement was a revealing maneuver. While most of the federal government received longer-term funding, the Department of Homeland Security, and especially Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), was given only a short-term extension. That asymmetry was deliberate. It preserved leverage over one of the most controversial federal agencies without triggering a prolonged shutdown, while also exposing the narrow terrain on which Congress is still willing to confront executive power. As with so many recent budget deals, the decision emerged less from open debate than from late-stage negotiations compressed into the final hours before the deadline.

How the Deal Was Framed

Democrats used the funding deadline to force a conversation about ICE’s enforcement practices, but they were careful about how that conversation was structured. Rather than reopening the far more combustible debate over immigration levels, deportation priorities, or statutory authority, they framed the dispute as one about law-enforcement standards, specifically transparency, accountability, and oversight.

Keep ReadingShow less
ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You
A pole with a sign that says polling station
Photo by Phil Hearing on Unsplash

ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You

The brutality of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the related cohort of federal officers in Minneapolis spurred more than 30,000 stalwart Minnesotans to step forward in January and be trained as monitors. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s demands to Minnesota’s Governor demonstrate that the ICE surge is linked to elections, and other ICE-related threats, including Steve Bannon calling for ICE agents deployment to polling stations, make clear that elections should be on the monitoring agenda in Minnesota and across the nation.

A recent exhortation by the New York Times Editorial Board underscores the need for citizen action to defend elections and outlines some steps. Additional avenues are also available. My three decades of experience with international and citizen election observation in numerous countries demonstrates that monitoring safeguards trustworthy elections and promotes public confidence in them - both of which are needed here and now in the US.

Keep ReadingShow less