A bipartisan Arizona group that is pushing for open primaries in the state says it isn't surprised by the relatively low voter turnout in recent primary elections.
As in Iowa, Arizona requires voters to be affiliated with a major political party to be able to participate in primary elections.
Paul Johnson, former Phoenix mayor and member of the Make Elections Fair AZ executive committee, said from his experience, those who show up in what he calls "low-turnout primaries" tend to be the "most extremist" voters. He added that leads to more extreme candidates winning, but it also paints a skewed picture of how the public views issues.
"There is a great level of surprise by a great many people who just can't believe that we are continuing on with an outcome where the majority of us, somewhere near the General Election, are going to have to pick between what most people see as being the lesser of the best options," Johnson said.
Johnson added he considers the current system to be discriminatory toward Independent and unaffiliated voters. He argued open primaries would ease polarization.
Arizona allows unaffiliated voters to participate in any party primary they choose, but does not allow those who are registered with one party to vote in another's. Supporters of closed primaries argue they are essential for preserving party ideals and influence.
Sarah Smallhouse, chair of Make Elections Fair AZ, said Arizona's Independent and unaffiliated voters have to take extra steps to be able to participate in primary elections, and many times they don't -- which can lead to a false sense of representation.
"In the sliver of primary voters that are making all of these important decisions, you don't actually have representation from the largest group of registered voters in the state?" Smallhouse asks. "That is a problem."
The group wants to note that both the Republican and Democratic parties are necessary, but is convinced that open primaries would "draw the best out of both of them," as it could facilitate a constructive and holistic political landscape.
The initiative would not stop parties from endorsing a candidate, but they would no longer be guaranteed a place on the General Election ballot.The group is still collecting the signatures, needed by this June, to get the measure onto the November 2024 ballot.
Disclosure: Make Elections Fair AZ contributes to our fund for reporting on Civic Engagement. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
By Kyla Russell for WISH-TV.
Broadcast version by Joe Ulery for Indiana News Service reporting for the WISH-TV-Free Press Indiana-Public News Service Collaboration
Indiana Lt. Gov. Micah Beckwith said he supports efforts to redistrict Indiana's U.S. House seats, and he's seen what could be redrawn maps floating around, but has not seen any official maps.
He shared his thoughts on Friday in a one-on-one interview with I-Team 8.
"People want to scream about gerrymandering. Listen, every state does it. Democrats do it. Republicans do it. I think what Republicans have kind of fallen into the trap of doing for many years in the establishment way of thinking is if we just play nice, they'll play nice, if and when they're in power. We found out that that doesn't happen. So, listen, we've got the ball. We need to run the ball down the field, and we should do everything we can to make big wins for Republican principles, constitutional concepts and I believe ... the Republican Party embodies those principles better than the other party does. So, I'm fully in support of President Trump and his offensive-minded strategy here."
Beckwith told I-Team 8 he does not know exactly what happened on Thursday in a closed-door meeting at the Statehouse with Vice President JD Vance, Gov. Mike Braun and other top state lawmakers.
However, Beckwith said, he is aware of the taxpayer cost to calling a special session.
He says it's worth it.
"I think in the long run, if we can get the outcome that we're looking for, I think it will be certainly we're going to have to spend money. Yes, they are expensive. Nobody takes that lightly. That is certainly a conversation that needs to be had, and we need to look at that. But, I do think if we can take the 1st and 7th districts back, and really make Indiana a powerhouse red state, and then also give Washington a boost with a little bit more in the majority there. I think, economically, it will pay off in the long run, and I think we'll see our investment have big returns."/p<>
Kyla Russell wrote this article for WISH-TV.
get more stories like this via email
A public funding mechanism for Seattle elections is up for renewal in next week's election.
The Democracy Voucher program was passed 10 years ago. It offers voters four $25 vouchers to use each election cycle for candidates who accept certain fundraising and spending limits. Supporters said it is a model for more inclusive democracy, touting higher turnout, increased participation from more small donors and a more diverse candidate field.
Spencer Olson, spokesperson for the group People Powered Elections Seattle, which supports Proposition 1, said the program helps level the playing field.
"It's really important that people's voices are heard and that candidates can run being supported by their constituents," Olson contended. "Versus just listening to those wealthiest donors, those special interests that have historically been the loudest voices at the table and really dominated what priorities rise to the top."
The voucher is supported by a property tax. Olson and other supporters hope to bring the model statewide. Critics said the program is not big enough to make a difference in elections and has not curbed outside spending. Ballots are due by 8 p.m. Tuesday.
Olson pointed out the vouchers have succeeded in encouraging more diverse participation in local elections.
"The intention of the program was to bring a public financing program to Seattle elections to help empower more candidates -- more diverse candidates, women, renters, people of color -- to have equal access to be able to run, and run competitive elections without having to rely on wealthy donors, special interests," Olson emphasized.
Olson noted because the money comes from a dedicated tax levy, unused vouchers roll over to the next election.
"The goal isn't to create an unlimited pot of money but to be able to provide resources for candidates to run with the community's support," Olson stressed. "But it's not a blank check at the same time."
get more stories like this via email
Texas lawmakers will return to Austin on July 21 for a special legislative session called by Gov. Greg Abbott.
The 18 items on the agenda include redrawing congressional maps. Redistricting usually occurs every 10 years, following the census, but Abbott added the item to the agenda after the Department of Justice drew attention to four Democratic seats.
Christina Sanders, founder of the nonprofit PoliChic Engagement Fund, said Texas maps are already caught up in litigation.
"Some of the court cases that are still even pending from the maps that have not been drawn fairly and the potential impact of new maps in the middle of a census cycle," Sanders explained.
The Biden administration sued Texas, alleging the state's legislative and congressional district maps discriminate against Latino and Black voters. The Justice Department, under President Donald Trump, withdrew from the lawsuit earlier this year.
The seats targeted by the Justice Department are held by Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, Rep. Sylvia Garcia, D-Texas, and Rep. Marc Veasey, D-Texas. They are also focused on the vacant seat previously held by late Congressman Sylvester Turner. Following the 2023 legislative session, Abbott called four special sessions to pass a school voucher bill, which failed.
Sanders feels Abbott is using special sessions to push personal agendas.
"A special session would be for something like the flood that just occurred," Sanders argued. "It would be something that there is an emergency -- something immediate needs to happen at this moment -- because this policy for the state cannot wait."
Flood warning systems and communication are also on the agenda, along with hemp and THC legislation and changes to the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness test.
Disclosure: The PoliChic Engagement Fund contributes to our fund for reporting on Civic Engagement, Civil Rights, Community Issues and Volunteering. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email