Blog

Posted on

NEMRA Becomes SB 499

On Monday, March 23, 2015 a version of the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act was formally introduced as a bill for the 2015 session of the Nevada Legislature.
SB 499, as it is now formally known, was introduced by the Senate Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections. The version to be considered, sadly, does not include the ranked choice / instant runoff voting component because of concerns of conflict with Article 15, Sec 14 of the Nevada Constitution which declares a plurality winner. 
However, the bill does improve the chances for minor party or independent candidates to advance to the general election. Under the top-two format in SB 499, two candidates from the same party cannot advance. This eliminates the possibility of two Democratic or two Republicans facing off in the general election. Minor party and independent candidates are relevant and viable candidates in the primary. Debate is not limited to two sides of the same story.

The next step is a committee hearing. I’ll keep you posted. 
Posted on

Does The Media Purposely Fan The Flames Of Political Divisiveness?

The days of Edward R. Murrow, Walter Chronkite, Chet Huntley, David Brinkley, Frank McGee, Eric Sevareid, and Nancy Dickerson are gone. Reporting the facts has been replaced with commentary, meant to evoke emotion, entertain, and “sell”.  We pay attention only to those whose commentary support our already cemented opinions and rally to the heightened emotion and rush to “buy”.
Does The Media Purposely Fan The Flames Of Political Divisiveness?  Anne Kim, editor and co-founder of Republic 3.0 and The Hill contributor provides the answer in her March 12, 2015 The Hill column “When the political press becomes the polarizer”.
“All of this is why political journalism might be fanning the flames of the polarization that it both decries and eagerly covers. And in fact, centrists and political moderates are among the first victims of today’s politics-as-reality-show political coverage.  For one thing, the bias toward conflict-focused coverage creates a reality distortion field where the context for any proposal becomes a pitched battle between two opposing forces. Differences in opinion are magnified into “rifts,” and disagreements morph into “feuds.” And moderates — who are inherently inclined to compromise — are almost inevitably cast as the villains.”
In her article, Kim notes research by University of Pennsylvania political scientist Matthew Levendusky further showing how partisan media may reinforce these divisions. “Through a variety of experiments aimed at measuring partisan media’s impacts, Levendusky found that exposure to polarizing media can make people “a little more extreme, a little less positive toward the other side, more unwilling to compromise, and more willing to ascribe negative traits to the leaders of the other party.” A final consequence of current trends in political journalism is ironic, given the immense resources given over to political coverage: Americans may end up even less informed than ever about the policy choices the nation must make. And so long as serious policy efforts have little chance of winning equally serious coverage from the press, politicians have even less reason to offer solutions that make sense.”

 

Don’t believe the reality TV analogy? Check out my September 12, 2014 posting “New Reality TV Show Based On Congressional Gridlock” highlighting the reality TV show Rival Survival.  In my opinion, we have become a society that wants to be entertained rather than informed and at times confuse what we hear when being entertained with fact.

 

This is also a major part of the problem. The media, whether online, broadcast, or print, is in the business of making money. Therefore, they provide a product that is in demand. If the demand was for facts and unbiased reporting of all sides of an issue that is what would be provided. Herein lays the solution.

 

By allowing all voters, regardless of party registration or registration as Non-Partisan to vote for any candidate regardless of party affiliation or status as a Non-Partisan in the primary election, the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act (NEMRA) could bring the discussion of issues back towards the majority of voters who want policy makers to collaborate and compromise rather than remain ideologically pure to find and implement solutions. This in turn potentially raises the demand for unbiased information. Enough to change the media demand? Only implementation of NEMRA and time will provide the answer.  
Posted on

Non-Partisan and Minor Parties Still Lead Voter Registration Growth

The Nevada Secretary of State’s office has released voter registrationstatistics for February, 2015 and voters continue to favor registration as Non-Partisan or in one of the minor parties over the Democratic or Republican Party.
The need for a change to Nevada’s election statute to address this continuous growing trend is once again justified.
Jan 2015
Feb 2015
Diff
%
State
Rep
424,791
425,484
693
+0.16
Dem
488,705
489,473
768
+0.16
N/P
238,812
240,098
1,286
+0.54
Other
79,350
79,611
261
+0.33
Clark
Rep
257,221
257,881
660
+0.26
Dem
366,464
367,249
785
+0.21
N/P
169,375
170,340
965
+0.57
Other
50,599
50,813
214
+0.42
Washoe
Rep
85,190
85,457
267
+0.31
Dem
78,853
78,991
138
+0.18
N/P
41,769
42,123
354
+0.85
Other
16,395
16,499
104
+0.63
18 – 34
Rep
73,859
74,005
146
+0.20
Dem
112,866
112,916
50
+0.04
N/P
86,052
86,451
399
+0.46
Other
24,586
24,588
2
+0.008
Total not R or D
State
25.8
25.9
+0.1
Clark
26.1
26.1
+0.0
Washoe
26.2
25.2
-1.0
18 – 34
37.2
37.3
+0.1

Posted on

Voter Registration Trend Continues In 2015

The Nevada Secretary of State’s office has released voter registrationstatistics for January, 2015 and the trend of voters favoring registration as Non-Partisan or in one of the minor parties over the Democratic or Republican Party continues.
The 78th regular session of the Nevada Legislature is under way. Voter registration trends provide the justification to act now on the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act (NEMRA).
Dec 2014
Jan 2015
Diff
%
State
Rep
424,332
424,791
459
+0.11
Dem
487,986
488,705
719
+0.15
N/P
237,497
238,812
1,315
+0.55
Other
78,985
79,350
365
+0.46
Clark
Rep
256,784
257,221
437
+0.17
Dem
365,559
366,464
905
+0.25
N/P
168,402
169,375
973
+0.58
Other
50,353
50,599
246
+0.49
Washoe
Rep
85,253
85,190
-63
-0.07
Dem
78,910
78,853
-57
-0.07
N/P
41,588
41,769
181
+0.44
Other
16,358
16,395
37
+0.23
18 – 34**
Rep
66,482
73,859
7,377
+11.1
Dem
102,551
112,866
10,315
+10.0
N/P
78,784
86,052
7,268
+9.2
Other
22,207
24,586
2,379
+10.7
Total not R or D
State
25.7
25.8
+0.1
Clark
26.0
26.1
+0.1
Washoe
26.1
26.2
+0.1
18 – 34
37.4
37.2
-0.2

      ** This age group experienced a 10.1% increase in registered voters (+27,339)
Posted on

Mississippi, Arizona, and New York Consider Top-Two or Ranked Choice / Instant Runoff Voting

In January, 2015, three states, Mississippi, Arizona, and New York took steps to bring either the Top-Two primary or Ranked Choice / Instant Runoff  Voting (RCV / IRV) to their electoral process.
Following an editorial in the Jackson, Mississippi Clarion-Ledger in August, 2014 (reported on this blog), the state’s Secretary of State compiled a committee to study three election reforms and make recommendations.  The committee looked at primary election systems, early voting, and online voter registration. The committee’s report was released January 16, 2015.
In the area of primary election reform the committee looked at the four systems currently in use; Closed, Semi-Closed, Open, and Top-Two. The recommendation was for Mississippi to adopt a Top-Two primary.
In Arizona, a bill to require the state’s voting system to be upgraded to accommodate RCV has been introduced in the Arizona House of Representatives.
In New York, a bill introduced by Democratic State Senator Liz Krueger that would create a pilot program allowing ten local governments to use IRV in 2019 and 2020 has been referred to the Senate Elections Committee.

Mississippi, Arizona, and New York are adding their voices to the message that our electoral process is broken. The Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act (NEMRA) as proposed, implementing a Top-Three primary and RCV would make Nevada the leader in addressing this problem. 
Posted on

Non-Partisans Outnumber Republicans In Over 14% Of Assembly and Senate Districts

In addition to the interesting numbers hidden in the December 2014 voter registration totals, active voters registered as Non-Partisan outnumber active voters registered in the Republican Party in 14.3 percent of both assembly and senate districts. In no district do Non-Partisans outnumber those registered in the Democratic Party. In two assembly districts Republicans outnumber Non-Partisans by less than 100 voters.
District
% Democratic
% Republican
% Non-Partisan
% Other
SD 2
59
14
22
5
SD 4
62
14
19
5
SD 10
51
20
22
7
AD 6
67
9
19
5
AD 7 *
57
18.7
19.4
5
AD 11
59
13
23
5
AD 14
54
19
21
6
AD 16
49
20
24
7
AD 28
59
14
22
5
* Difference is 166 voters resulting in 19 percent each if rounded.
In AD 15 there are 4,822 Non-Partisans compared to 4,871 Republicans, a difference of 49 voters. In AD 24, the numbers are 6,235 Non-Partisans versus 6,331 Republicans, a difference of 96.

There are eight stateswhere independent voter registration outnumbers registration for both major parties. Is Nevada poised to join this list? If the current trend continues, I believe there is no question. The Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act (NEMRA) will ensure Nevada’s elected officials truly represent the voters of the state.  
Posted on

Run-Up To February 2nd

In fourteen days, the 78th regular session of the Nevada legislature will convene.  Between then and 5:00 PM on February 9, 2015, each assembly member can submit one Bill Draft Request (BDR). Each senator can submit two. In addition, standing committees in each chamber can submit a total of 50 BDR up until 5:00 PM on February 16,, 2015.  The Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act (NEMRA) has a chance to be one of them.
As of January 16, 2015, 32 of the 949 BDR submitted deal with some subject relating to elections. Of those, only three have bills issued; SB 5 (BDR 90), AB 23 (BDR 446), and SB 19 (BDR 477).
Meetings continue. In the past two weeks I have met with committee leadership. Meetings with other key individuals are being coordinated.
In his State of the State address, Governor Sandoval laid out his plans, the steps he believes are necessary to continue Nevada’s journey into the future as a national leader in education, our economy, and a quality of life for its residents. One of the final paragraphs of this speech summed it up: “From the vantage point of this new foundation, from the watershed moment of our 150th birthday, we can cast our gaze to the horizon – to the world we want for the graduating class of 2023: an educated and healthy citizenry, a vibrant and sustainable economy, safe and livable communities, and an efficient and responsive state government.” The last seven words, “and an efficient and responsive state government.” show a role for NEMRA. 
Posted on

December Voter Registration – Interesting Numbers Hidden In Minor Changes

The Nevada Secretary of State’s office released voter registrationstatistics for December, 2014 on January 5, 2015.  While the overall comparison to the end of November shows the state lost only 1,828 active registered voters (0.15%). A closer look reveals some interesting developments. (Percentages are the difference between November and December 2014)
Younger voters, those 18 – 24 years old left the voting rolls in droves, -30,238 (25.6%) Of these voters
            12,239 left the Democratic Party (28.5%)
            7,045 left the Republican Party (26.1%)
            8,447 were registered as Non-Partisan (22.1%)
            2,507 left the minor parties (25.7%)
Older voters, those 65 and over replaced the younger voters, +32,849 (11.0%) Of these voters
            13,565 joined the Democratic Party (11.1%)
            12,221 joined the Republican Party (9.8%)
            5,180 registered as Non-Partisan (14.0%)
            1,883 joined one of the minor parties (13.1%)
The Republican Party lost 420 more voters than the Democratic Party; 1176 to 756 (0.28% to 0.15%)
Non-Partisan and registration in minor parties increased; 84 (0.04%) and 20 (0.03%) respectively
In Clark County all parties gained registered voters with registration as Non-Partisan and in minor parties leading the way
            Democratic Party – 963 (0.26%)
            Republican Party – 474 (0.18%)
            Non-Partisan – 975 (0.58%)
            Minor Parties – 292 (0.58%)
In Washoe County all parties lost registered voters evenly
            Democratic Party – 1706 (2.1%)
            Republican Party – 1717 (2.0%)
            Non-Partisan – 970 (2.3%)
            Minor Parties – 334 (2.0%)

Why did the younger voters depart? Were they part of the majority that did not bother to vote in November? The more important question is how do we get them to return and vote? Is the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act (NEMRA) part of the answer?
Posted on

Ensuring A Majority; Top-Three With RCV / IRV – Can Voters Accept and Understand?

The goal of any election, whether for political or organizational office, is for the winner to be the candidate that receives the majority of the votes cast.  Using an election process that ensures a majority, rather than a plurality winner, means the candidate elected most likely represents the views of a majority of their constituents.  
Perhaps that is why 17 political jurisdictions, 101 political parties, organizations and corporations, and 68 colleges and universities use some form of Ranked Choice / Instant Runoff Voting (RCV / IRV). (* These numbers represent those reported. Actual use could be higher) Perhaps that is why The Utah Republican Party and the Arlington County, VA, County Democratic Committee (ACDC) have implemented RCV / IRV.  Perhaps that is why Roberts Rules of Order, the leading parliamentary standard includes the use of RCV / IRV. Perhaps that is why politicians, political organizations and publications endorse RCV / IRV. Perhaps that is why a system first used in the late 1800’s is still in use today.
There is a slightly held misconception that RCV / IRV is difficult to understand, that voters will have difficulty casting their ballots and not accept RCV / IRV. Exit data and polls combined with the level of use outlined above clearly put that misconception to rest.
In one group of polling data looking at San Francisco, CA; Burlington, VT; Takoma Park, MD; Cary, NC; and Hendersonville, NC, an average 89 percent of voters understood RCV / IRV.  78.4 percent preferred its use.
In Portland, ME, 94 percent of voters understood RCV / IRV with 66 percent finding it easy. Voters also found campaigns to be more positive with more information available.
In Minneapolis, MN, 90 percent understood the process and 95 percent found it simple to use. When asked if they favored RCV / IRV, 68 percent either preferred it or said it didn’t matter while 65 percent wanted it used in future elections.
The above examples are for uses of RCV / IRV in the pure sense. Since no primary election is held, some races have had a large number of candidates requiring several rounds of runoff. However, voters still understood and accepted the process.
The Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act (NEMRA) makes the process even easier to understand and use. Because NEMRA includes a primary election narrowing the general election field down to three requiring only one round of runoff should no candidate receive 50 percent plus one first choice votes, the process of ranking several candidates is reduced to simply selecting a first and second choice.  The difference between the current primary / general election system and NEMRA is negligible while the benefit is substantial. This should result in even greater voter acceptance than experienced in other jurisdictions.
Another election method that ensures a majority winner that is used in Washington and California, and in modified form in Louisiana, and Nebraska is the Top-Two non-partisan open blanket primary. With voters selecting the two candidates moving forward to the general election, one candidate will receive the majority of the votes cast. However, as I detailed in August “You Can’t Compare NEMRA to California’s Top-Two”, NEMRA has the potential to provide greater benefits to candidates, voters, political parties, and governing bodies.
It’s no secret that partisanship now shapes our daily lives more than any other issue.  Getting our political discussion back to a level where legislatures can solve the issues facing their constituents should be a priority. The Arlington County Democratic Party in Virginia and voters in Portland, ME verify what other studies have found, systems that use RCV / IRV can accomplish this.
2015 is the year Nevada can join the nearly 200 reported (*actual use could be higher) governmental, political and private, and educational institutions and groups that have implemented RCV / IRV by enacting NEMRA.  These organizations have found this system, which ensures a more representative governing body, where election winners have the clear support of a majority of the electorate, is widely accepted and easily understood. Nevadans deserve no less.  

Posted on

February 9, 2015, 5:00 P.M.

According to NRS 218D. 150legislators may submit their final Bill Draft Requests (BDR) between the start of the legislative session; February 2, 2015, and 5:00 P.M. on the eighth day of the session, in this case, February 8, 2015. Assembly members may submit one BDR during this period. State Senators are allowed two.
In addition to this allotment, prior to the first day of the session; February 2, 2015, the Assembly Speaker and Senate Majority Leader may each submit BDR’s equal to the number remaining from the 15 allotted to the previous Speaker and Majority Leader. As of December 5th, 14 remain for the Speaker while the new Senate Majority Leader has the full 15 remaining. The Minority Leaders of both the Assembly and Senate are allowed to complete the allotment of 10 each. As of December 5th, the Assembly Minority Leader has submitted two leaving eight for the new Minority Leader. The Senate Minority Leader can submit 10 before the star of the session.
As of December 5th, very few legislators have used their full allotment of BDR. The opportunity for a legislator to take the lead, to clearly demonstrate to all Nevada voters they matter, and file a BDR for the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act (NEMRA) is there until 5:00 P.M. on February 9, 2015.

To make it easy, the necessary detail needed for submission to allow the Legislative Council Bureau (LCB) to write the bill is available here. 
Proudly powered by WordPress