Why Voters Rejected Election Reform

Published

7 months ago

December 16, 2024

admin

This was supposed to be the year that political reform took off. A nearly $100 million campaign gave voters in seven states the opportunity to scrap party primaries, enact ranked-choice balloting, or both. Advocates of overhauling elections had billed the proposals as a fix for two of the most hated problems in politics: gridlock and polarization. And they promised nothing short of a transformation across state capitols and Congressmore compromise, less partisanship, and better governance.

Voters said No, thanks. Election-reform measures failed nearly everywhere they were on the ballot in Novemberin blue states such as Colorado and Oregon, in the battlegrounds of Nevada and Arizona, and in the Republican strongholds of Montana, Idaho, and South Dakota. Alaska was the only state where reformers prevailed: By a margin of just 737 votes, the state rejected an effort to repeal a recently adopted system that combined nonpartisan primaries with ranked-choice voting.

Read: How 2024 could transform American elections

The results were a resounding defeat for boosters who had hoped to expand Alaskas first-in-the-nation voting method, dubbed Final Four Voting, to other states. And these outcomes proved that reformers still havent figured out how to sell the country on possible solutions to core problems that voters repeatedly tell pollsters they want addressed. Mea culpa, Katherine Gehl, the entrepreneur who has championed the system for years, told me. We have totally failed at the marketing.

Final Four advocates are now debating their path forward. Gehl wants to keep pushing in the hope that a renewed education campaign will win over voters. Others worry that the problem runs deeperand think that scaling back the proposal could be the only viable route. However frustrated voters are with politics, they clearly arent ready to reshape how they elect their leaders.

Marketing Final Four isnt easy. Explaining how the proposal works and why it would improve governance in a 30-second TV spot would challenge even the best ad makers. The system starts with a primary open to all parties and candidates. The top four finishers advance to the general election, where the winner is determined by ranked-choice votingitself a relatively new innovation with which many voters are unfamiliar.

The ultimate goal is to reward, rather than punish, cross-party dealmaking. In many states and districts dominated by either Republicans or Democrats, representatives must cater to only the small, polarized slice of the electorate eligible to vote in closed party primaries. Because their general elections arent competitive, they have little reason to appeal to people beyond their base. The combination of open primaries with ranked-choice voting, Gehl and other advocates argue, allows for more competitive elections. In turn, those will encourage representatives to campaign and legislate with a broader pool of voters in mind, while ensuring that a larger portion of the electorate has a meaningful voice in the election.

Alaska voters approved the system in a 2020 referendum and, in its inaugural run two years later, elected a Democrat to the U.S. House for the first time in 50 years while handing a conservative Republican governor a second term. They also reelected the moderate Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski. In the state Senate, the elections resulted in a bipartisan governing coalition that generated a flurry of compromises. For Final Fours supporters, Alaska was a clear success.

Not everyone agreed. Opponents of the system, joined by the state Republican Party, organized a repeal drive that galvanized opposition to the proposal in other states and nearly ended the Alaskan experiment in its infancy. Critics branded Final Four as an exercise in oligarchyan attempt by wealthy donors with ulterior motives to foist a confusing system on voters who didnt want or need it.

In Colorado, opponents charged that one of the ideas chief backers, the businessman Kent Thiry, sought to change the states rules to ease his own path to the governors office (a claim Thiry denied). Final Fours defeat there this year was a profound rejection by the grassroots of big money in politics, Senator Michael Bennet, a Colorado Democrat who opposed the reform, told me.

Gehl says she remains committed to the entire Final Four proposal, but others in the movement think the design might need adjustments. It proved to be a lot for voters to swallow, said Thiry, who co-chairs Unite America, a reform group that spent more than $50 million on ballot campaigns across the country. (Thiry pegged the reform movements total spending as in the neighborhood of $100 million.) We need to look at both what we are proposing as well as how to market it.

Although the proposals do not inherently advantage one party over the other, Republicans have turned against ranked-choice voting in particular, and the idea has fallen out of favor with some political reformers who say its use in Maine and cities including New York and San Francisco has done little to improve local elections or governance. Many of the ads that Final Four backers ran focused only on the open-primary part of the reforman acknowledgment that ranked-choice voting would be a tougher sell. (For her part, Gehl avoids the words ranked-choice voting entirely, preferring the term instant-runoff elections instead.)

Nick Troiano: Party primaries must go

Eric Bronner, a co-founder of the group Veterans for All Voters, told me that internal polling in Nevada found much higher support for nonpartisan primaries than for ranked-choice voting; exit polling commissioned by Unite America in Colorado found a similar split. Ranked voting seems to be struggling because of both its complexity and the emerging partisan divide over the idea. That gap appeared to bear out in election results: In Montana, a proposal calling for a top-four primary fell short of passage by just two percentage points, while in Oregon, a ballot measure to use ranked-choice voting in major statewide elections lost by 15 points.

For reformers, the defeat in Nevada might have stung the most. Because state law requires that constitutional amendments pass in two consecutive elections, voters revisited a proposal that they had already approved in 2022one that combined nonpartisan primaries with general elections run by ranked-choice voting. Despite its earlier success, the measure failed by six points, a result that its backers attributed in part to a better-funded opposition campaign. The yes campaign still spent far more money in the state, but with so much focus on the presidential campaign, Bronner said, it couldnt break through. In the absence of a compelling message, voters stuck with the status quo. Everyone agrees the current system is not working well, he told me. But then theres a hundred different possible solutions, and getting people to agree on one and then care enough about it that theyre willing to go knock on doors or sign petitions we just havent cracked the code on that yet.

In Colorado, top Democrats were split on the Final Four proposal. Governor Jared Polis and Senator John Hickenlooper endorsed the idea, but the state Democratic Party and Bennet, Colorados senior senator, campaigned against it. Bennet told me the change would represent a radical transformation of the states election system, which he didnt mean as a compliment. Colorados current election system is a gold standard that does not need fixing, he said, and proponents of Final Four made little effort to win support from the ground up. Bennet belittled arguments from Gehl and others that the system would decrease polarization and improve governance. Their claim is not based on evidence, he told me. Its based on game theory.

If theres a consensus among Final Fours boosters, its that Novembers results should not represent the last verdict. They reject the idea that Americans were issuing a vote of confidence in their political system, even as they acknowledge that advocates have yet to persuade voters to back a fix for it.
Although the reformers razor-thin margin of victory in Alaska wasnt exactly a ringing endorsement, Gehl said the win allows Final Four more opportunities to produce results. Its going to take time for us to see the full flowering of what a Final Four voting system creates in terms of healthy competition, innovation, results, and accountability, she told me. It could easily take 10 years.

In the meantime, proponents could move on to other ideas. Shortly after the election, a pair of centrist Democrats, Representatives Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington State and Jared Golden of Maine, introduced legislation proposing a select House committee on electoral reform. In a letter accompanying the proposal, a group of academics declared that polarization in American politics is deeper now than at any point since the Civil War. Election reform, they wrote, can produce a less hostile politics, a better functioning Congress, and a more representative democracy. Among the proposals the panel would consider are expanding the size of the House of Representatives, creating multimember congressional districts with proportional representation, and establishing independent redistricting commissions. The legislation also mentions the two changes embedded in Final Four: nonpartisan primaries and ranked-choice voting.

Getting Congress to agree even to study these ideas, let alone mandate them, will be a tall order in a Republican-controlled Congress. Its not something that we expect to go places tomorrow, Dustin Wahl, the deputy executive director of the reform group Fix Our House, told me. But this is the important step that we would need to take to move in the direction of transformational electoral reform.

Nick Troiano, Unite Americas executive director, said his group was already looking at possible targets for more incremental advances. He mentioned Pennsylvania and Arizona as places where state legislators might agree to open their primaries to all voters even if the full Final Four system wasnt viable. Kent Thiry also plans to push forward, comparing the drive for election reform to other movementssuch as those advocating for womens suffrage, racial equality, and same-sex marriagethat suffered setbacks before succeeding. But when I asked him whether he would help fund efforts to get Final Four on the ballot again in 2026, he was unsure. We havent decided that yet, Thiry said. The wounds are too fresh.

UK

How e-bike riders are doing double the speed limit – and many of them work for fast food delivery firms

Published

1 hour ago

July 20, 2025

admin

How e-bike riders are doing double the speed limit - and many of them work for fast food delivery firms

It’s lunchtime on Birmingham’s New Street.

Close to its many restaurants, food delivery riders are congregating on their bikes.

The area is packed with shoppers and workers.

PC Paige Gartlan is approaching with other officers. She’s on the lookout for illegally modified e-bikes – and she knows she’ll find them here.

“You can physically tell by looking at the bike that it’s generally going to be illegal – the battery pack is taped on to the sides and generally the size of the motor that’s on the back wheel,” she explains.

Sky News has been invited on an operation by West Midlands Police to find these bikes and get them off the streets.

PC Gartlan has been hit by one before. She’s had to tackle a rider to the floor after he drove into her.

Within minutes, she’s spotted a suspicious-looking bike. The rider makes a run for it – followed by plain-clothed officers.

PC Gartlan tests the bike – it’s showing a top speed of 52km/hr on the speedometer – just over 30mph.

The speed limit for e-bikes in the UK is 15.5mph when using electric power for assistance.

I look up the street and another two riders have been detained. In less than an hour, officers have confiscated four bikes – all were being ridden by fast food delivery drivers.

The commotion is attracting a lot of attention.

“They are dangerous,” Sandra, who has just finished work, tells me.

She’s stood watching the riders being questioned. She says she’s had near-misses herself and is worried for the safety of the elderly and children.

It’s not just West Midlands police officers here – immigration officials are carrying out checks too. They’re involved in a nationwide operation, which has seen more than 7,000 arrests in the last year – a 50% increase on last year.

Matthew Foster, the immigration enforcement lead officer for the West Midlands, tells me they’ve already found one individual who has entered the UK unlawfully.

“He’s been detained,” he says, “to affect his removal from the UK.”

Further down the street, police are loading illegally modified bikes on to a van – they’re destined to be crushed. One of them had belonged to Demoz.

He’s on his way home, carrying a big box with the logo of one of the main fast food delivery firms on it.

He tells me he used to have an illegal bike, but he thought his new one was legal.

“I make a mistake, I have to say sorry, I will do better for the future,” he says.

I get in touch with the big delivery firms; Deliveroo, Uber Eats, and Just Eat.

Their representatives say they constantly remind workers of their safety obligations, and that they’re all working closely with the government to increase security checks on riders.

As he leaves, Demoz, now bike-free, tells me he’s thinking of changing his job.

UK

I can’t help feel Harry’s team are trying to push the reset button – here’s why

Published

1 hour ago

July 20, 2025

admin

I can't help feel Harry's team are trying to push the reset button - here's why

Watching pictures of Prince Harry in Angola this week took me back to 2019, when we were there for his first visit following in Princess Diana’s footsteps.

The pictures on Wednesday looked so similar; his effortless interactions with people who face the daily dangers of landmines, and his obvious passion to help a charity that he cares deeply about.

Of course so much has happened in the six years since then, but with other headlines this week, I couldn’t help but feel like we could be looking at the beginning of a reset for Harry.

It started last Saturday night, as the story emerged of a meeting between the King’s communications secretary, Harry’s new London-based head of PR, and Harry’s most senior aide in America.

Three people you may not have heard of, but a meeting that was quickly described as “peace talks”.

The pictures of the get-together were being sold for thousands of pounds by the paper that ran them, just one indication of the global fascination about whether father and son may be on the road to reconciliation.

Neither side are willing to go there when you ask what exactly they talked about, although I suspect some of it was much more practical than about trying to mend this fractured relationship.

Things like trying to avoid unnecessary negative stories, for example, the kind where Harry is accused of snubbing his father because they just happen to be doing jobs on the same day.

It’s tricky for Harry’s camp to avoid such a situation when they don’t have sight of the King’s diary.

There’s also been the chatter about who may, or may not, have leaked the meeting.

There has been speculation around why they were out on a balcony, and who spotted the photographer in the park.

But whether it was a leak, or just a really good spot from a journalist or photographer, it’s not a bad thing for either side that we’re now all talking about whether father and son may be close to patching things up.

It did however raise other questions, about what it means for Prince William and his relationship with his brother.

So far there have been no indications of any meeting between William’s team and that of his brother.

The feelings of William also, you may think, a consideration for the King.

The unexpected headlines around Harry just kept coming, as on Tuesday he popped up in Angola.

His second visit there, this time with no press pack in tow.

So why the surprise visit?

Harry has worked with the Halo Trust for some time, and it’s clearly still a priority for them to highlight the dangers faced by those living with the potential dangers of landmines in Angola.

But it also feels like part of a push to get Harry out on more public engagements.

I’ve been told that since moving away from the UK he has continued to have regular contact with those charities with which he’s maintained ties, but being on the phone or a video call, isn’t the same as physically being there in person.

We saw something similar with his trip to China with Travalyst earlier this year, some may argue not the best choice of destination, but another example of wanting to get him physically out on visits to reinforce publicly those connections with causes that matter so much to him.

For some months now it’s felt like Meghan has regained an element of control over how she wants to be seen.

Just look at her social media accounts and the success of her “As Ever” brand.

Whether Harry for the first time would step on to the social media scene with his own public account we wait to see, although the idea of his own commercial project is more likely, with suggestions something may be in the pipeline, we wait and see what.

After a constant flow of stories in recent months relating to court cases or his ongoing row with his family, this week has felt different.

A lot has been made about Harry and Meghan establishing a new “court” and what lies behind their decision to hire new people, five years after they stepped away from royal life.

There are of course elements of the recent past that it is impossible to erase, even Harry, in his recent interview talked of how he would “love reconciliation with my family” but added, “Of course, some members of my family will never forgive me for writing a book. Of course, they will never forgive me for… lots of things.”

But it does feel like their new team are tentatively attempting to push the reset button; getting Harry out on more engagements just one way they hope to focus our minds back on to what he has always done best.

World

Migrants locked up in notorious El Salvador jail released in Venezuela-US prisoner swap

Published

4 hours ago

July 20, 2025

admin

Migrants locked up in notorious El Salvador jail released in Venezuela-US prisoner swap

On Friday, Paola Paiva waited in a hotel near Caracas airport, nervous but giddy with excitement to be reunited with her brother, finally.

For five months, Arturo Suarez has been detained in a notorious prison in El Salvador.

“I am going to wait for my brother to call me,” she told Sky News, “and after giving him a hug, I want to just listen to him, listen to his voice. Let him talk and tell us his story.”

Suarez was one of the more than 250 Venezuelan migrants who had been living in America but were arrested in immigration raids by the Trump administration and sent to El Salvador, a showpiece act in the president’s promise to deport millions of migrants.

Most of the men had never even been to El Salvador before. Their detention has been controversial because the White House claims the men are all part of the dangerous Tren de Aragua gang but has provided little evidence to support this assertion.

The only evidence Paola had that Suarez was still alive was a picture of him published on a news website showing the inside of the maximum security CECOT jail.

He is one of dozens of men with their hands and feet cuffed, heads shaved and bodies shackled together.

Now he is returning to his home country, one of the bargaining chips in a deal that saw the release of ten Americans and US permanent residents who had been seized by the Venezuelan authorities.

Paola had tried to go to the airport to greet her brother as he disembarked a charter plane bringing the men back from El Salvador but authorities told her to wait at a nearby hotel.

“They told us they are taking them all to a hotel to rest,” she said.

“But I managed to get someone to give my phone number on a piece of paper to my brother, so I am expecting his call tomorrow, as soon as he can access a phone.

“We heard they are going to perform some medical exams on them and check their criminal records,” she added. “I’m not afraid; I’m not worried since my brother has a clean record.

“I am so happy. I knew this day would happen, and that it would be unexpected, that no one was going to notify us. I knew it was going to be a total surprise.”

The Trump administration had paid the El Salvador government, led by President Nayib Bukele, millions of dollars to imprison the men.

Homeland security secretary Kristi Noem visited CECOT last month, posing in front of prisoners for a photo opportunity.

But Cristosal, an international human rights group based in El Salvador, says it has “documented systematic physical beatings, torture, intentional denial of access to food, water, clothing, health care,” inside the prison.

A video which was seemingly filmed aboard the charter flight bringing the Venezuelan migrants back to Caracas shows Arturo briefly talking about his experience inside.

He looks physically well but speaks into the camera and says: “We were four months with no communication, no phone calls, kidnapped, we didn’t know what (the) day was, not even the time.

“We were beat up at breakfast, lunch and dinner,” he continues.

Sky News interviewed Arturo Suarez‘s brother Nelson near his home in the US in April, weeks after Arturo – an aspiring singer – had been arrested by immigration and customs enforcement (ICE) agents while filming a music video inside a house.

Nelson said he believed Arturo’s only crime was “being Venezuelan and having tattoos.” He showed me documents that indicate Arturo has no criminal record in Venezuela, Chile, Colombia or the United States, the four countries he has lived in.

Now Nelson is delighted Arturo is being released – but worries for his future.

“The only thing that casts a shadow in such a moment of joy is that bit of anger when I think that all the governments involved are going to use my brother’s story, and the others on that flight, as political gain,” he said.

“Each of them will tell a different story, making themselves the heroes, when the reality is that many innocent people suffered unfairly and unnecessarily, and many families will remain separated after this incident due to politics, immigration and fear.”