Hi Friend, Yesterday, three political advertisements for candidates flashed back-to-back across my television screen — something Americans across the country are noticing, and likely you are, too. It begs an important and recurring question — one that speaks to the core of the work we do: Do these commercials actually make any real difference come election day? It has been reported by the nonpartisan firm AdImpact that $9.7 billion is projected to be spent on political ads during the 2022 election cycle — a figure surpassing spending in not only all previous midterm cycles but presidential cycles, too. The kicker? The skyrocketing cost of elections comes alongside the continually decreasing number of seats in Congress that are actually decided in November (the majority are decided in the primary.) As of now, the Cook Political Report has rated 87 percent of congressional seats safe for one party — meaning that the astronomical amount of money spent between now and November that shows up on your TV and in your mailbox, at most, only makes a difference in 13 percent of races. This country doesn’t need more bucks competing for fewer eyeballs and votes. What we need are more and better choices on our ballots. We need candidates who are competing to represent all their constituents, not just the special interests that donate to their campaigns and the party's that support them. This is what our work in election reform is all about. With this in mind, here are three other things to consider this week: |
|
|
| The primary election season has come to a close and media attention has shifted toward predicting outcomes in November. But before we can look ahead, let's look back at some key take aways from this primary election season to understand where we’ve landed. Here are a few key takeaways that Beth Hladick highlights in her latest blog: - Per research from our friends at FairVote, 120 candidates for House, Senate, and statewide office won primaries this year with less than majority support.
- Nine states hold primary runoff elections if a winner doesn’t receive 50% of the vote (or, in the case of North Carolina, 30% of the vote). This additional election is costly to administer, (we’re talking millions and millions) and, while they help guarantee consensus winners, these runoffs at a later date typically have low and unrepresentative voter turnout.
- Of the 22 districts that held runoff elections for U.S. House contests this year, on average, just 4.6% of the districts’ voting age Americans cast ballots to determine nominees.
So, in short, runoffs are costly and unrepresentative. There’s a way to solve this with an instant runoff by using ranked choice voting. It creates a more seamless process for voters and election administrators alike (all while saving taxpayers’ money!). Read Beth Hladick’s blog to learn more. |
|
|
| Last week, we shared with you just how big this year is for reform. 2022 will see the highest ever number of states, cities, and municipalities with ranked choice voting on the ballot! Spreading across the country with undeniable momentum, ranked choice voting is on the ballot in Nevada, Evanston IL, Ojai CA, Fort Collins CO, and numerous other jurisdictions. This week, we want to share a new resource from our friends at FairVote, which can help you discover where ranked choice voting is on the ballot and how you can get involved in supporting ballot initiatives nationwide. Check out Fair Vote’s helpful pre-election resource guide here. | |
|
Regards, Alana __ Alana Persson Unite America |
|
|
Want to stop receiving our weekly Three Things Thursday emails? Unsubscribe from Three Things Thursday, or Unsubscribe from all Unite America communications. Unite America | 1580 Lincoln St Suite #520 Denver, CO 80203 Paid for by Unite America PAC INC. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. www.uniteamerica.org
|
|
|
|