Author: Doug Goodman

Posted on

Close of Voter Registration – Non-Partisans and Minor Party Will Determine Outcome

Voter registration for the 2016 general election has closed. Some interesting numbers: -5.87%,    -3.92%, +19.21%, +7.93%. These are the percentage of change in voter share since the last presidential election for the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, Non-Partisan, and minor parties. Here is the 2012 to 2016 comparison.
State-Wide
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share – 2012
% Voter Share – 2016
Difference in Voter Share %
% Change
D
50,693
9.62
41.90
39.44
-2.46
-5.87
R
52,062
11.92
34.73
33.17
-1.36
-3.92
NP
85,229
38.86
17.44
20.79
3.35
19.21
Other
19,214
25.78
5.93
6.40
0.47
7.93
Total not D or R
23.37
27.19
3.82
16.35
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +8.95%; Lib +5.84%; other 5 parties +114.10%
Clark County
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share – 2012
% Voter Share – 2016
Difference in Voter Share %
% Change
D
48,545
12.44
45.82
43.09
-2.73
-5.96
R
33,753
12.84
30.85
29.12
-1.73
-5.61
NP
70,055
46.24
17.78
21.76
3.98
22.38
Other
14,145
29.95
5.54
6.03
0.49
8.84
Total not D or R
23.32
27.79
4.47
19.17
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +9.12%; Lib +57.86%; other 5 parties +170.00%
Washoe County
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share – 2012
% Voter Share – 2016
Difference in Voter Share %
% Change
D
3,701
4.77
37.60
35.86
-1.74
-4.63
R
6,197
6.74
38.08
37.25
-0.83
-2.18
NP
9,407
22.11
17.62
19.70
2.08
11.80
Other
2,757
17.03
6.71
7.19
0.48
7.15
Total not D or R
24.33
26.89
2.56
10.52
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +2.92%; Lib +57.20%; other 5 parties +50.18%
 Rural Counties
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share – 2012
% Voter Share – 2016
Difference in Voter Share %
% Change
D
-1,553
-3.38
27.94
24.23
-3.71
-13.28
R
12,112
14.76
49.92
51.45
1.53
3.06
NP
5,794
22.93
15.37
16.97
1.60
10.41
Other
2,312
20.80
6.77
7.34
0.57
8.42
Total not D or R
22.14
24.31
2.17
9.80
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +15.97%; Lib +63.0%; other 5 parties +16.76%
Voter registration for the 18 days of October strengthen the assumption that in addition to turnout, those registered as Non-Partisan and in minor parties will determine the outcome. Younger voters, those between the ages of 18 to 34 should also have a major impact. Their numbers grew by just over 10 percent in these 18 days. That is on top of the seven percent growth recorded for that demographic in September. Another point that should gain attention is that in 18 days many of the changes in voter share exceed + / – one-half percent.
Early voting has begun. As voters head to the polls, the trend, fewer voters associating with either major political party continues.  We will know the true impact in a few weeks.
 State-Wide
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
29,102
5.30
39.44
-0.12
R
17,751
3.77
33.37
-0.61
NP
25,164
9.01
20.79
0.64
Other
6,252
7.15
6.40
0.09
Total not D or R
27.19
0.73
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +5.06%; Lib +10.73%; other 5 parties +12.59%
Clark County
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
24,562
5.93
43.09
-0.17
R
12,382
4.36
29.12
-0.55
NP
19,277
9.53
21.76
0.64
Other
4,371
7.67
6.03
0.08
Total not D or R
27.79
0.72
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +5.89%; Lib +11.71%; other 5 parties +11.14%
 Washoe County
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
3,249
3.56
35.86
-0.18
R
2,168
2.26
37.25
-0.66
NP
3,716
7.71
19.70
0.66
Other
1,208
6.81
7.19
0.18
Total not D or R
26.89
0.84
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +3.0%; Lib +9.50%; other 5 parties +18.08%
Rural Counties
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
1,291
3.0
24.23
-0.29
R
3,201
3.52
51.45
-0.32
NP
2,171
7.51
16.97
0.53
Other
673
5.28
7.34
0.08
Total not D or R
24.31
0.61
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +4.25%; Lib +8.44%; other 5 parties +10.50%
18 – 34 Year Old
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
13,378
9.46
39.45
-0.21
R
6,168
7.17
22.87
-0.61
NP
13,914
13.16
29.68
0.82
Other
3,409
11.81
8.01
0.13
Total not D or R
37.69
0.95
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +8.64%; Lib +15.20%; other 5 parties +16.77%
55+
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
5,951
2.56
40.05
-0.05
R
4,984
2.10
40.64
-0.24
NP
3,669
4.53
14.20
0.26
Other
1,008
3.42
5.11
0.04
Total not D or R
19.31
0.30
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +2.78%; Lib +4.02%; other 5 parties +7.65%
 Major party loses also continue in congressional and legislative districts.
Congressional Districts
Party
# Districts Lose Voter Share
# Districts Gain Voter Share
# Districts No Change
Democratic
4
0
0
Republican
4
0
0
Non-Partisan
0
4
0
Other
0
4
0
In CD 1 there are over two percent more voters registered as Non-Partisan than Republican. When minor party registrations are added, the difference is over eight percent.
State Senate Districts
Party
# Districts Lose Voter Share
# Districts Gain Voter Share
# Districts No Change
Democratic
20
0
1
Republican
21
0
0
Non-Partisan
0
21
0
Other
0
21
0
In 13 districts (61.90%) the number of voters registered as Non-Partisan or the total number not affiliated with either major party is greater than or within 5% of the number of voters registered to one of the major parties. This is an increase of one district over September, 2016
State Assembly Districts
Party
# Districts Lose Voter Share
# Districts Gain Voter Share
# Districts No Change
Democratic
42
0
0
Republican
42
0
0
Non-Partisan
2
40
0
Other
0
42
0
In 29 districts (69.05%) the number of voters registered as Non-Partisan or the total number not affiliated with either major party is greater than or within 5% of the number of voters registered to one of the major parties. This is an increase of 2 districts over September, 2016
This data reinforces the fact that voters are disillusioned with the current state of the political landscape and are expressing that disillusionment by not affiliating with either major political party or any political party. I do not believe the parties can reverse this feeling in the near future. They can however, recognize the landscape and adapt to it. The Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act of 2017 (NEMRA – 2017) provides the tool.

Posted on

2016 – Have We Reached the Pinnacle of Negativity?

Campaign Season 2016 backs up recent studies that show partisanship is the most divisive issue facing our nation and that civility has all but disappeared from our political process.  Unless something is done to reverse this trend, could we reach the point where the ability to govern ceases?
According to a Pew Research study released October 18, 2016, elected officials are viewed as least likely to act in the public’s best interest.  A clear majority, 54 percent have “not too much confidence” while another 19 percent express “no confidence”. Only three percent express a “great deal of confidence” that elected officials act in the public’s best interest.  
The impact of negativity on legislating becomes critical when looking at the recent history of divided government; one party has the presidency and the other party controls at least one chamber of Congress, and voters support or opposition for single party control.  It is also important when one party controls both the executive and legislative branches of government, minimizing or shutting out the views and input of the minority party.
It is up to candidates and elected officials to set the tone and climate of the campaigns and legislative sessions. However in recent years, the level of partisanship expressed by the vocal minority of voters (the so-called party base) makes collaboration difficult for out of fear of upsetting the base..losing the next primary election.  It is often difficult for rational, respectful dialog and debate to take place.
It does not have to be this way. Civility, the willingness to listen to opposing views, and then collaborate on solutions can be returned to our political process. Elected officials can rise from the bottom and regain the trust of all Americans. The use of Ranked Choice / Instant Run-off Voting (RCV / IRV) has shown to be the way.
In 2015, Fairvote.org released a two-year study, The Civility Project, which looked at the impact of RCV / IRV on the tone of campaigns. It also looked at voter understanding of the process. Overall, the study found campaigns were less negative according to both voters and candidates. Voters had no problem understanding the process and expressed support for it over previously used systems. Civility during the campaign should translate to more collaboration and civility when legislating.
All elections are “local”. How a state elects its representatives in the U.S. House of Representatives down to how members of a city council are elected is determined by the states. In Nevada, the legislature can take a step towards restoring civility to the campaign and legislative process by enacting the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act of 2017 (NEMRA – 2017) during the session that begins in less than four months.

Posted on

Broken Political System Biggest Cause of Negative Economic Progress and Competitiveness

Jobs and the economy are often the top concerns mentioned by voters. Now the state of our political process is being listed as the major contributor to what many see as a sluggish recovery where the middle class is being left behind.
The biggest obstacle to U.S. economic progress and competitiveness is our broken, highly partisan, political system. This is the opinion of a Harvard Business School report published last month (September, 2016).
According to the authors of the report“PROBLEMS UNSOLVED AND A NATION DIVIDED; The State of U.S. Competitiveness 2016 Including findings from Harvard Business School’s 2016 surveys on U.S. competitiveness” “..we believe that our political system is now the major obstacle to progress on the economy..” and “..that dysfunction in America’s political system is now the single most important challenge to U.S. economic progress.”
Before writing specifically about the political dysfunction, the authors cover an overview of economic competitiveness, U.S. economic performance, the business environment, the need for a national economic strategy, and tax reform.  However, there is a constant theme throughout the report. All the issues addressed require a political environment that allows for collaboration, a clear discussion of opposing points of view, and agreement on public and private actions required.
The report also mentions the findings of Pew Research, findings that I have also reported and mentioned several times, that partisanship is the most divisive issue facing this country. It also lists election reforms that could be implemented to return the political process to the point where solutions could be achieved.
If our country, our states, our counties, and our cities are to make economic progress and be competitive, our political and governing mechanisms must facilitate the implementation of programs addressing the various elements of a vibrant economic system. Civility must be a cornerstone. The willingness to actively listen to all points of view, to collaborate on solutions to the root causes must be allowed to flourish.  
During the 2015 Nevada legislative session, the Senate Legislative Operations and Elections Committee introduced legislation to change the political climate in Nevada. The bill as introduced varied from the Bill Draft Request (BDR) and following a hearing, the bill language was stripped and the bill used for another purpose.
In 2017, legislators can take off where the  2015 session left off by filing a BDR then enacting  the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act of 2017 (NEMRA – 2017).

Jobs and the economy are often the top concerns mentioned by voters. The creation of jobs is a key argument as the Nevada legislature considers a tax increase to build a football stadium, as I write this article. Perhaps the Nevada legislature should take the findings of the Harvard Business School seriously. The key to fixing Nevada’s economy could be easier than originally thought.
Posted on

Younger Voters (18 – 34 years old) Increase by 7 Percent / Non-Partisan Tops 20 Percent

Voter registration numbers for September, 2016 have been released and two numbers stand out. The number of voters 18 – 34 years of age grew by almost seven percent. This is not quite double (75 percent) the overall increase for the state (3.86 percent). Also, for the first time, voters registered as Non-Partisan top 20 percent of total active voters.
The Democratic and Republican Parties should also be concerned in that they continue to lose voter share to Non-Partisan and minor parties and are picking up new voters at a rate less than one-half the rate of those two groups. This continuing trend resonates across all demographics.
State-Wide
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
17,473
3.29
39.56
-0.22
R
11,643
2.53
33.98
-0.44
NP
17,614
6.73
20.15
0.54
Other
4,861
5.88
6.31
0.12
Total not D or R
26.46
0.66
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +3.47%; Lib +9.81%; other 5 parties +13.17%
Clark County
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
15,309
3.84
43.26
-0.27
R
8,257
2.99
29.67
-0.43
NP
14,144
7.52
21.12
0.60
Other
3,402
6.35
5.95
0.10
Total not D or R
27.07
0.70
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +3.85%; Lib +10.48%; other 5 parties +13.03%
 Washoe County
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
1,461
1.63
36.04
-0.25
R
1,210
1.28
37.91
-0.41
NP
2,250
4.90
19.04
0.46
Other
897
5.32
7.01
0.20
Total not D or R
26.05
0.66
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +2.0%; Lib +9.27%; other 5 parties +15.13%
Rural Counties
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
703
1.66
24.52
-0.26
R
2,176
2.45
51.77
-0.14
NP
1,220
4.41
16.44
0.26
Other
562
4.61
7.26
0.13
Total not D or R
23.70
0.39
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +2.75%; Lib +7.83%; other 5 parties +8.43%
18 – 34 Year Old
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
7,910
5.76
39.66
-0.39
R
3,577
4.34
23.48
-0.56
NP
9,162
9.46
28.86
0.62
Other
2,562
9.74
7.88
0.21
Total not D or R
36.74
0.83
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +5.40%; Lib +14.35%; other 5 parties +17.68%
55+
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
4,248
1.86
40.10
-0.13
R
4,255
1.83
40.88
-0.14
NP
3,005
3.85
13.94
0.22
Other
875
3.06
5.07
0.04
Total not D or R
19.01
0.26
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +2.19%; Lib +3.83%; other 5 parties +9.22%
Major party loses also continue in congressional and legislative districts.
Congressional Districts
Party
# Districts Lose Voter Share
# Districts Gain Voter Share
# Districts No Change
Democratic
4
0
0
Republican
4
0
0
Non-Partisan
0
4
0
Other
0
4
0
In CD 1 the number of voters not affiliated with either major party exceeds those registered as Republican by 5.79%. The difference between GOP and Non-Partisan in CD1 is <0.25%. At the end of July, 2016 the difference was over 0.60%
State Senate Districts
Party
# Districts Lose Voter Share
# Districts Gain Voter Share
# Districts No Change
Democratic
21
0
0
Republican
21
0
0
Non-Partisan
0
21
0
Other
0
21
0
In 12 districts (57.14%) the number of voters registered as Non-Partisan or the total number not affiliated with either major party is greater than or within 5% of the number of voters registered to one of the major parties.
State Assembly Districts
Party
# Districts Lose Voter Share
# Districts Gain Voter Share
# Districts No Change
Democratic
42
0
0
Republican
42
0
0
Non-Partisan
2
40
0
Other
0
42
0
In 27 districts (64.29%) the number of voters registered as Non-Partisan or the total number not affiliated with either major party is greater than or within 5% of the number of voters registered to one of the major parties. This is an increase of 3 districts over August, 2016
September was National Voter Registration Month. Voters registered as Non-Partisan and not affiliated with either major political party will be a major factor in many races. By registering as Non-Partisan or in a minor party, voters are clearly stating something is wrong with either the two-party system or the way the Democratic and Republican Party are addressing the issues.
These voters’ concerns should also be recognized during the upcoming Nevada legislative session as well as in Congress and county commission and city council meetings.  The Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act for 2017 (NEMRA – 2017) provides the path to accomplish this task.

Posted on

We’re in the Middle of the Mud Field and Sinking Fast (Opinion)

The current campaign season is one of the most toxic I can remember in my 55 years of paying attention. This has not happened over-night. Campaigns at all levels have been slowly becoming more negative for at least the past decade. However, since 2014, it appears candidates are in a competition not to win the election but rather to see who or which party can sling the most mud and create the widest gap between themselves and facts. Combined with the extreme negative impact of partisanship on our society, this is not healthy for our country, our state, our counties, or our cities. If this is allowed to continue, will we damage our political process beyond repair?
I’d like to borrow a song title penned by John Lennon; “Imagine”.
Just imagine:
Imagine if voters were not perceived as gullible by those sponsoring campaign ads
Imagine if voters did not “buy” what campaigns, PAC’s and Super PAC’s were currently “selling”
Imagine if media and journalists were unbiased and “reported” rather than present opinion and commentary as fact
Imagine if fact-checking was not necessary
Imagine if truth and personal integrity were the cornerstones of how candidates were judged
Imagine country, state, county, city, and all constituents, not political party, being the most important consideration of all candidates and elected officials
Imagine if voters had facts readily available on which to base decisions
Imagine if candidates could move beyond talking-points
Imagine if candidates stressed what they would do, change, and improve instead of what their opponent(s) did or will do wrong
Imagine if campaigns, candidate debates, and the act of governing were respectful discussions of the issues despite differences of opinion
Imagine if voters cast their ballot for who they believed was the most qualified not on the perception of the lesser of evils
Imagine if lawmakers were not afraid to collaborate with members of the other party
Just imagine
But looking through rose-colored glasses does not reveal reality.
We have evolved (?) into a society:
Where partisanship divides us more than any other issue
Where respect for opinions that are different from our own has nearly disappeared
Where differing opinions spark feelings of hate and even calls for violence
Where many journalists are no longer reporters but rather commentators issuing opinion presented and accepted as fact
Where the decision to publish by media appears to be based on sales potential not added value to factual discussion
Where emotion allows bent truth and lies to be accepted as fact
Where talking points built on our emotion is all we use to base our decision without questioning
Where our votes are against the opposing candidate not really for the candidate we support
Where lawmakers are fearful or outright refuse to collaborate with the other party
It has not always been like this. We’ve had presidents able to work with a divided congress. We’ve had state legislatures able to work through partisan differences. We’ve had campaign seasons where respectful discussion of the issues provided voters with the ability to make informed decisions. We’ve had journalists and media who reported facts and labeled commentary and opinion as such.
Rose-colored glasses can be turned in to clear ones. It will take hard work, determination, and the willingness to make tough decisions by lawmakers and candidates. It will take voters willing to stand up and demand facts, clear discussion of the issues, and stop “buying” the current rhetoric.
In just over four months, the Nevada legislature can take steps to change rose-colored to clear by continuing the work on election reform started during the 2015 session. By re-introducing and enacting the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act for 2017 (NEMRA – 2017), the groundwork will be laid. You can make your voice heard by signing the petition to legislative leaders here.

Posted on

Active Voters Shrink As Major Parties Continue to Lose Voter Share

The number of active voters in Nevada decreased in August due to routine clean-up of the voter rolls but that did not impact the continuing trend of both the Democratic and Republican Party losing voter share. What is also not changing is the fact Non-Partisan and “other” or minor political parties are growing at a faster rate than either major party.
With the 2016 general election two months away, voter registration efforts are in full swing. Given that the number of total voters, both active and inactive, increased by just under 16,000, these efforts are meeting with success. It is also clear these voters are turning away from the major political parties.  
State-Wide
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
-6,409
-1.13
39.78
-0.10
R
-5,299
-1.14
34.42
-0.09
NP
-667
-0.25
19.61
0.13
Other
139
0.17
6.19
0.07
Total not D or R
25.80
0.20
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP -1.55%; Lib +1.25%; other 8 parties +7.37%
Clark County
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
-6,294
-1.55
43.53
0.00
R
-5,828
-2.07
30.10
-0.11
NP
-1,982
-1.04
20.52
0.10
Other
-231
-0.43
5.85
0.07
Total not D or R
26.37
0.17
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP -2.56%; Lib +0.34%; other 8 parties +8.04%
 Washoe County
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
-60
-0.07
36.29
-0.07
R
-501
-0.53
38.32
-0.24
NP
707
1.56
18.58
0.27
Other
119
0.71
6.81
0.04
Total not D or R
25.39
0.31
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP -0.75%; Lib +1.80%; other 8 parties +5.96%
Rural Counties
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
307
0.73
24.78
-0.14
R
1,030
1.17
51.91
-0.07
NP
608
2.25
16.18
0.15
Other
251
2.10
7.13
0.06
Total not D or R
23.31
0.21
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +1.50%; Lib +4.45%; other 8 parties +4.77%
18 – 34 Year Old
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
-919
-0.66
40.05
0.15
R
-1,690
-2.01
24.04
-0.23
NP
-251
-0.26
28.24
0.23
Other
192
0.74
7.67
0.14
Total not D or R
35.91
0.37
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP -2.25%; Lib +1.58%; other 8 parties +9.03%
55+
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
-1,680
-0.73
40.23
-0.08
R
-1,285
-0.55
41.02
-0.00
NP
-87
-0.11
13.72
0.06
Other
-33
-0.12
5.03
0.02
Total not D or R
18.75
0.08
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 5 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP -0.92%; Lib +0.56%; other 8 parties +6.00%
Major party loses also continue in congressional and legislative districts.
Congressional Districts
Party
# Districts Lose Voter Share
# Districts Gain Voter Share
# Districts No Change
Democratic
2
2
0
Republican
3
1
0
Non-Partisan
0
4
0
Other
1
3
0
In CD 1 the number of voters not affiliated with either major party exceeds those registered as Republican by 5.79%. The difference between GOP and Non-Partisan in CD1 is <0.25%. At the end of July, 2016 the difference was over 0.60%
State Senate Districts
Party
# Districts Lose Voter Share
# Districts Gain Voter Share
# Districts No Change
Democratic
13
7
1
Republican
20
1
0
Non-Partisan
3
18
0
Other
0
20
1
In 12 districts (57.14%) the number of voters registered as Non-Partisan or the total number not affiliated with either major party is greater than or within 5% of the number of voters registered to one of the major parties.
State Assembly Districts
Party
# Districts Lose Voter Share
# Districts Gain Voter Share
# Districts No Change
Democratic
24
17
1
Republican
39
2
1
Non-Partisan
8
34
0
Other
1
39
1
In 24 districts (57.14%) the number of voters registered as Non-Partisan or the total number not affiliated with either major party is greater than or within 5% of the number of voters registered to one of the major parties. This is an increase of 1 district over July, 2016
September, 2017 has been declared Voter Registration Month by the secretary of state. It will be interesting to see the changes at the end of the month. I expect the trend will continue providing legislators in the 2017 session of the Nevada legislature a choice. Legislators can leave the election process as is with fewer voters choosing our elected officials or they can change the process, recognizing the growing dissatisfaction among the electorate. The Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act of 2017 (NEMRA – 2017), provides the mechanism for this needed change.

Posted on

Major Parties Lose Voter Share As Non-Partisan and Minor Parties Out Front in Growth

The Nevada Democratic Party could be seeing the impact of Bernie Sanders supporters. The Republican Party could be seeing the impact of Donald Trump. Or it could be the trend of voters believing the major political parties do not represent them continues unabated.
Whether one or all of the above apply, July, 2016 voter registration numbers show Non-Partisan and minor party registration out-pacing both the Democratic and Republican Party in rate of growth while at the same time gaining voter share as both major parties lose.
The question also needs to be asked, what is happening with the “other” category? This is a consolidated group of parties not ballot qualified such as the Green and Whig and is continuing to show growth of over 10 percent. This is happening at the same time the Libertarian Party is growing by approximately 5 percent and the Independent American Party by 1 ½ percent.
State-Wide
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
8,564
1.62
39.88
-0.11
R
5,938
1.29
34.51
-0.20
NP
7,890
3.10
19.48
0.23
Other
2,531
3.17
6.12
0.07
Total not D or R
25.70
0.30
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 8 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +1.71%; Lib +4.27%; other 8 parties +10.56%
Clark County
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
7,146
1.80
43.53
-0.11
R
3,678
1.32
30.21
-0.21
NP
6,000
3.26
20.42
0.24
Other
1,851
3.56
5.78
0.08
Total not D or R
26.20
0.32
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 8 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +1.64%; Lib +4.58%; other 8 parties +11.73%
  
Washoe County
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
1,161
1.31
36.36
-0.15
R
1,264
1.34
38.56
-0.15
NP
1,342
3.06
18.31
0.02
Other
474
2.92
6.77
0.08
Total not D or R
25.08
0.10
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 8 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +2.25%; Lib +4.12%; other 8 parties +4.71%
Rural Counties
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
257
0.61
24.92
-0.15
R
996
1.15
51.98
-0.02
NP
548
2.07
16.03
0.14
Other
206
1.76
7.07
0.04
Total not D or R
23.10
0.18
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 8 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +1.36%; Lib +3.16%; other 8 parties +3.84%
18 – 34 Year Old
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
2,598
1.91
39.90
-0.45
R
1,835
2.23
24.27
-0.20
NP
3,743
4.01
28.01
0.25
Other
1,157
4.64
7.53
0.11
Total not D or R
35.54
0.36
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 8 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +2.66%; Lib +5.71%; other 8 parties +10.07%
55+
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
2,381
1.04
40.31
-0.07
R
2,305
0.99
41.02
-0.10
NP
1.654
2.17
13.66
0.13
Other
556
1.98
5.01
0.04
Total not D or R
18.67
0.17
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 8 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +1.11%; Lib +2.14%; other 8 parties +9.67%
Major party loses are also the trend in congressional and legislative districts.
Congressional Districts
Party
# Districts Lose Voter Share
# Districts Gain Voter Share
# Districts No Change
Democratic
4
0
0
Republican
4
0
0
Non-Partisan
0
4
0
Other
0
4
0
In CD 1 the number of voters not affiliated with either major party exceeds those registered as Republican by 4.77%
State Senate Districts
Party
# Districts Lose Voter Share
# Districts Gain Voter Share
# Districts No Change
Democratic
19
1
1
Republican
20
1
0
Non-Partisan
0
21
0
Other
2
19
0
In 12 districts (57.14%) the number of voters registered as Non-Partisan or the total number not affiliated with either major party is greater than or within 5% of the number of voters registered to one of the major parties. This is an increase of 1 district over June, 2016
State Assembly Districts
Party
# Districts Lose Voter Share
# Districts Gain Voter Share
# Districts No Change
Democratic
37
5
0
Republican
28
2
2
Non-Partisan
0
42
0
Other
1
40
1
In 23 districts (54.76%) the number of voters registered as Non-Partisan or the total number not affiliated with either major party is greater than or within 5% of the number of voters registered to one of the major parties. This is an increase of 1 district over June, 2016
The 2017 session of the Nevada legislature convenes in six months. Bill draft requests (BDR) are being submitted now. By filing a BDR for the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act of 2017 (NEMRA – 2017), legislators can show they are ready to address the partisanship that is causing the continuing exodus.
You can let the secretary of state and legislative leaders know you want NEMRA – 2017 passed during the 2017 session by signing the petition on Change.org.

Posted on

Race for Washoe County School Board District C – Another Justification for NEMRA – 2017

The race for Washoe County School District Board of Trustees District C trustee has become a textbook example of why the 2017 session of the Nevada legislature needs to enact the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act – 2017 (NEMRA – 2017).
Because the incumbent resigned before completing one-half their term and after the filing deadline for the primary election, the new school board trustee could be elected with the support of less than 15 percent of the registered voters in the district. Perhaps 80 percent of those who did vote will have voted for someone else. Mandate? Not even close.
 As of July 14, 2016, there were 47,552 registered voters in District C. Since this race is non-partisan, party registration does not matter. Average voter turnout for school board trustee elections in presidential election years (1996, 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012) is 67.9 percent. Using current registration, this means 32,288 voters can be expected to cast ballots for District C school board trustee. With a relatively strong turnout why such low support for the winner and such a strong justification for NEMRA – 2017?
Five candidates, no runoff of the top two vote getters as the case with the other four school board races that were contested in the primary, and 32,288 votes split five ways.  With less than 6,500 votes needed for election, the new trustee will not have the support of a significant majority of voters.
Under NERMA – 2017 this would be different. Regardless of the number of candidates, the winner would have the support of a much larger segment of the district. With a large plurality, if not majority of support, the newly elected trustee would take their seat knowing they truly represent the district and voters would be confident their representative on the school board represents their interests.
By utilizing a system where the primary and general election are rolled into one, where voters only have to go to the polls once, voter turnout is maximized and those elected have a much larger base of support.
Allowing government officials to be elected with low levels of support can make governing, the setting of policy, difficult. Can an elected official make the right decision knowing they are speaking for only a small portion of their constituents? Can voters have confidence in the decisions of their representative when a significant number did not support their election? It’s unlikely. And an election system that fosters such an outcome needs to be seriously re-evaluated and eventually replaced.
The race for Washoe County School District Board of Trustees District C will be the 22ndelection contest this year where the winner is decided by a small minority of voters, perhaps less than 15 percent.

Nevada’s lawmakers can make 2016 the last year where outcomes such as this are possible by passing the NEMRA – 2017 during the legislative session beginning in February.  
Posted on

Non-Partisan Voter Share Extends Gaining Streak as Democratic and Republican Parties Continue to Lose

The trend continues. Voter registration numbers for June, 2016 once again show Non-Partisan gaining voter share across all demographics at the expense of both the Democratic and Republican Parties. Non-Partisan also leads all other categories, with minor exception, in rate of growth. In this area, the two major parties are also eclipsed by the minor parties; Independent American, Libertarian, and the consolidated group of parties not ballot qualified such as the Green and Whig. The only bright spot for the Democratic Party is among 18 – 34 year olds where their voter share increased by over three percent.  
State-Wide
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
10,465
2.02
39.99
0
R
6,800
1.50
34.71
-0.18
NP
7,183
2.90
19.25
0.16
Other
1,842
2.35
6.05
0.02
Total not D or R
25.30
0.18
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 8 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +1.67%; Lib +3.12%; other 8 parties +5.31%
Clark County
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
9,617
2.48
43.64
-0.04
R
5,191
1.90
30.48
-0.20
NP
6,512
3.67
20.18
0.21
Other
1,562
3.10
5.70
0.03
Total not D or R
25.88
0.24
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 8 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +2.13%; Lib +3.50%; other 8 parties +7.55%
 Washoe County
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
478
0.54
36.51
-0.02
R
468
0.50
38.71
-0.03
NP
310
0.71
18.08
0.02
Other
130
0.81
6.69
0.02
Total not D or R
24.77
0.04
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 8 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +0.61%; Lib +2.08%; other 8 parties +0.35%
Rural Counties
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
370
0.54
25.07
-0.08
R
1,141
1.33
52.00
0.05
NP
361
1.38
15.89
0.02
Other
150
1.29
7.03
0
Total not D or R
22.92
0.02
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 8 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +1.10%; Lib +3.18%; other 8 parties +0.25%
18 – 34 Year Old
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
4,505
3.43
40.35
3.16
R
1,853
2.30
24.47
-0.22
NP
3,596
4.01
27.76
0.21
Other
878
3.15
7.42
0.03
Total not D or R
35.18
0.24
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 8 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +2.66%; Lib +3.67%; other 8 parties +6.95%
55+
Party
Change in # Voters
% Change
% Voter Share
Difference in Voter Share %
D
3,254
1.45
40.38
0.02
R
3,009
1.31
41.12
-0.04
NP
1,229
1.64
13.53
0.02
Other
386
1.39
4.97
0
Total not D or R
18.50
0.02
Other includes IAP, Lib, and 8 parties without ballot access.
Change is # voters: IAP +1.19%; Lib +2.14%; other 8 parties +2.58%
 Major party loses are also the trend in congressional and legislative districts.
Congressional Districts
Party
# Districts Lose Voter Share
# Districts Gain Voter Share
# Districts No Change
Democratic
4
0
0
Republican
3
1
0
Non-Partisan
0
4
0
Other
0
4
0
In CD 1 the number of voters not affiliated with either major party exceeds those registered as Republican by 4.77%
State Senate Districts
Party
# Districts Lose Voter Share
# Districts Gain Voter Share
# Districts No Change
Democratic
17
3
1
Republican
17
3
1
Non-Partisan
0
20
1
Other
4
16
1
In 11 districts (52.35%) the number of voters registered as Non-Partisan or the total number not affiliated with either major party is greater than or within 5% of the number of voters registered to one of the major parties
State Assembly Districts
Party
# Districts Lose Voter Share
# Districts Gain Voter Share
# Districts No Change
Democratic
29
12
1
Republican
33
7
2
Non-Partisan
3
39
0
Other
12
30
0
In 22 districts (52.35%) the number of voters registered as Non-Partisan or the total number not affiliated with either major party is greater than or within 5% of the number of voters registered to one of the major parties
Partisanship has reached new toxic levels and voters are reacting by rejecting both major parties. This will continue, creating legislative stalemates at all levels of government unless systemic change takes place. The choices:
Legislators can lead and implement change
Voters can force change by initiative
Do nothing  

Legislators in the 2017 Nevada legislative session can select the first choice, lead, by enacting the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act of 2017 (NEMRA – 2017)
Posted on

Partisanship Has Reached A New Level And It’s Not Good

A Pew Research Center study released June 22, 2016, “Partisanship and Political Animosity in 2016” needs to be taken very seriously by all who are concerned with our future. Unless this trend can be reversed, the political landscape will not be pleasant. Will the ability of lawmakers at all levels of government to effectively legislate come to a complete halt?

For the first time in almost 25 years, a majority of party members view the other party very unfavorably. With 70% of Democrats and 62% of Republicans who are politically active saying they fear the other party, how can the necessary dialog and collaboration take place? Answer, it can’t.
A summary of the study can be read here, the full report here. Some highlights:
·         With minor exception results are over 50 percent and in some cases close to two-thirds or three-quarters negative towards the other party and positive towards one’s own party
  •         Those who identify as Democratic are more partisan than Republicans
  •          Party membership is based on fear of the other party’s policies
  •          Those more active are more partisan
  •          Political discussion with the opposite side is stressful
  •          Political views are an indicator of a person’s character
  •          Words such as lazy, immoral, and closed minded describe the other party
  •          Words such as hard working, moral, and open minded describe my party
  •          Political views determine personal relationships
  •          The other party has no good ideas
  •          No compromise if my side doesn’t get more (this is why I prefer the idea of collaboration)

 I have highlighted the extent to which partisanship is impacting our political system in other articles on this blog. This trend is not new. However, as this most recent study finds, the problem is getting worse and shows no signs of getting better.

This is not how it has to be. It will take political will and determination to implement systems that have the potential to reduce the partisanship to a level where the needs and interests of the general constituency can be met. The Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act for 2017 (NEMRA – 2017) is such a system. Will the legislators of the 2017 Nevada state legislative session have the political will and determination to act?

Proudly powered by WordPress