A common narrative suggests that deeply polarized American voters always support their party's candidates, but a new study suggests otherwise in certain circumstances.
Researchers from Sacramento State and San Diego State universities asked more than 900 partisan voters about housing and homelessness - then asked them to choose, in a hypothetical local election - between a candidate from their party who disagreed with their views, or one from the opposite party who is aligned with them on policy.
Sacramento State Associate Professor of Political Science Danielle Martin co-authored the study.
"Overall, voters do support candidates from their own party - even when an opposite party candidate was closer to their views on one of those salient local issues," said Martin. "But we also found that about 40% defected from their party."
The study found that people with weak party loyalty were more likely to defect, as were people who are very invested in their policy position.
They also point out that in national and state-level races, people are much less likely to split their votes between parties.
Study co-author Professor of Public Policy and Administration Ted Lascher, also from Sacramento State, said the data show that voters are more flexible when an issue hits close to home.
"One of the implications is that somebody who's running, who's the out party, in terms of local party identification, may be able to win elections in city council and mayoral races," said Lascher, "if they choose the issue very carefully. Because voters will sometimes cross party lines on particular local issues."
San Diego State University Political Science Professor Brian Adams said this means that even though Democrats enjoy broad support in California, that support is more conditional than absolute in local races.
"A lot of this research suggests that if Republicans put forward candidates that actually agreed with some of the policy positions that Democratic voters have," said Adams, "at least some Democratic voters would be willing to switch."
About 96% of electoral contests in the U.S. are at the local level - for races such as the school board, the city council, and the county board of supervisors.
Support for this reporting was provided by the Carnegie Corporation of New York.
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