Mid-Term Elections Further Highlight Partisan Divide and Need For NEMRA

On October 30, 2014, the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) hosted a panel discussion, “By the Numbers: What the Midterms Mean for a Polarized America.” The hour and a half discussion, worth the time to watch, further highlights the partisan divide that exists and the likelihood that nothing will change following the November 4^th election.

The panelists for this discussion were Whit Ayres, Founder and President, North Star Opinion Research; Mark Mellman, Founder and President, The Mellman Group; Amy Walter, National Editor, The Cook Political Report. The panel focused on what party would control Congress following the election and how the results will impact the partisan divide in this country. Discussion included how national politics and PACs are increasingly impacting local campaigns, elections, and law making.

As with the BPC report, “Governing in a Polarized America: A Bipartisan Blueprint to Strengthen our Democracy”, released in June of this year and reported on this blog, this panel discussion further highlights the need for the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act (NEMRA) to be part of the upcoming Nevada legislature session.

Some highlights of the panel discussion:

·         Polarization and partisanship will continue unless the president can duplicate the Clinton model; sincerely work with both sides to reach consensus and achieve results

·         Tip O’Neill’s “All politics is local” no longer applies. National issues such as Obamacare, abortion, and immigration reform along with national PACs and Super PACs have found their way into state and local races where those issues have nothing to do with the elected position being sought or issues facing the city, county, or state (Yes, in Nevada too)

·         Substance of the debate is not important, party label is the driving factor. Witt Ayers referenced a poll done in 2013 on education. The question presented began with identifying which party was presenting the plan. The first iteration found Democrats supported the plan identified as the Democratic plan and Republicans supported the plan identified as the GOP plan by over 70 percent. The second iteration did not change to substance of the plans but simply swapped party label; the plan identified as the Democratic plan was now introduced as the GOP plan and the GOP plan as the Democratic. The results were identical.

·         The impact of partisanship over many aspects of our daily lives is hurting the process of governing. Party label overrides policy and lack of policy discussion keeps turnout low

·         Partisanship forces candidates to take extreme positions during the primary that may be difficult to overcome during the general election. The Kansas U.S. Senate race where Republican Pat Roberts has to overcome that obstacle in his race against Independent Greg Orman was cited as an example. The 1974 Senate race between Bob Dole and Bill Roy was also mentioned as the driving force behind Dole achieving the success he did.  

·         State legislatures are mirroring Congress. No one wants to take the necessary risks to solve issues in fear of losing political points

·         While some elected leaders want to collaborate on legislation, mirroring a recent NBC / Wall Street Journal poll on voter preference for compromise, party organizations and vocal base are not willing to take that path. Those elected as a result of this level of partisanship and low turnout move forward under a false belief of having a mandate

The broken legislative process can be fixed. Nevada legislators can take the lead by allowing NEMRA to be debated and voted upon during the 2015 legislative session. December 10, 2014 is the next deadline for Bill Draft Request (BDR) submissions. 

The Millennial Generation, The Future Of Government, And NEMRA

The Millennial Generation is the largest generation in American history. Recent estimates state there are between 80 to 90 million persons born between 1980 and 2000, far out-distancing both Baby Boomers and Gen X. 

They are also more politically complex, so different from what has been considered the norm, that the major political parties are perceived to be ignoring them rather than take steps to adjust to what is obviously a new political environment. For whatever the reason, that unwillingness does not bode well for our future.

Two recent studies; Pew Research in March, 2014 and the Reason / Rupe Survey released in July, 2014, present detailed insight to this political phenomenon. Combined, they provide what could be a foundation for the necessary change our political process must undergo if the Millennial Generation is to be successful in assuming their rightful position as the leaders of our cities, counties, states, and nation.

As I noted in a blog post of August 13, 2014, “How to get the Millennial Generation to the Polls”, the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act (NEMRA), provides a logical first step in the process of change.

Millennials do not trust either Republicans or Democrats. Neither major party truly represents them (at least the vocal minorities that are considered by party leadership as their base). Their views on social issues are more liberal yet they hold more centrist fiscal attitudes. Rather than join a party and conform to set political dogma, they stay away from those traditional associations. Nevada voter registration statistics confirm this.

Millennials believe both government and business play an important role but are not sure to what level each should control. They believe that personal choices and hard work are the major factors in determining one’s path in life.

In any discussion or debate of issues, progress cannot be made if both sides are not speaking the same language. If the same words take on different meanings, nothing positive can result. The Reason / Rupe survey gives an excellent example; “Only 16% of millennials can accurately define socialism making it less surprising that up to 42% prefer socialism and 52% favor capitalism.” This inability to communicate exacerbates the fear and worsens the divide.

Our future leaders, those of the Millennial Generation should not be shunned. Our political system, the political parties should be willing to make the necessary changes to make this generation feel welcome so they can begin making positive contributions to our overall well-being.  The Republican and Democratic parties in Nevada, through their elected officials, can take the first step by ensuring NEMRA is part of the 2015 legislative session.

  

Voters Registered As Non-Partisan Jump Ten Percent Since Last Election

The Secretary of State’s office today, released the final voter registration numbers for next month’s election; early voting starts Saturday, October 18^th.  From October 1^st thru October 14^th, more voters registered as Non-Partisan (3,202) than Democratic (2,466) or Republican (2,955).

Since the close of voter registration for the November, 2012 election, the number of active voters registered as Non-Partisan jumped more than ten percent. When combined with those registered in minor parties, there was a jump of almost nine and one-half percent of voters who choose not to affiliate with either the Republican of Democratic Party.  During the same time period, Democratic registration fell by over five percent. Republican registration held fairly constant, dropping only three-tenths of one percent.

The following tables show the breakdown by state, Clark County, Washoe County, voters 18 – 34 years of age, and total not affiliated with either major party. The major political parties do not have to view these numbers pessimistically. There can be a silver lining. The voting demographic has changed. Voters are losing faith in both the Democratic and Republican Party because of the move to the extreme to please a vocal minority. The Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act (NEMRA) provides a means for the parties to recognize this changing demographic. Filing of a Bill Draft Request (BDR) will allow the 2015 session of the Nevada State Legislature to debate the pros and cons of NEMRA and show voters their preferences are being noticed.

State	2014	2012	Difference	% + / -
N/P	19.2	17.4	+1.8	+10.3
Dem	39.8	41.9	-2.1	-5.1
Rep	34.6	34.7	-0.1	-0.3
Other	6.4	6.0	+0.4	+6.7

Clark	2014	2012	Difference	% + / -
N/P	19.9	17.8	+2.1	+11.8
Dem	43.5	45.8	-2.3	-5.0
Rep	30.6	30.9	-0.3	-1.0
Other	6.0	5.5	+0.5	+9.1

Washoe	2014	2012	Difference	% + / -
N/P	17.9	17.6	+0.3	+1.7
Dem	35.7	37.6	-1.9	-5.1
Rep	38.4	38.1	+0.3	+0.8
Other	8.0	6.7	+1.3	+19.4

18-34	2014	2012	Difference	% + / -
N/P	28.7	24.6	+4.1	+16.7
Dem	38.1	42.5	-4.4	-10.4
Rep	24.9	25.1	-0.2	-0.8
Other	8.3	7.8	+0.5	+6.4
Total Not Dem of Rep	2014	2012	Difference	% + / -
State	25.6	23.4	+2.2	+9.4
Clark	25.9	23.3	+2.6	+11.1
Washoe	25.9	24.3	+1.6	+6.6
18-34	37.0	32.4	+4.6	+14.2

.

Partisanship More Divisive Than Race

According to a study released June, 2014 by Stanford University, Fear and Loathing Across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization by Shanto Iyengar (Chandler Chair of Communication and Professor of Political Science, Stanford University) and Sean J. Westwood (Post-Doctoral Researcher, Princeton University) partisanship is now more divisive in our society than race. This study is the third such report released in June; the others being from the Bipartisan Policy Center and Pew Research, detailing how the current high level of political partisanship impacts many other aspects of our daily lives and social interaction. 

 

As part of the Stanford study, 1,000 people were asked to view the resumes of high school seniors competing for scholarships. Many of the resumes contained information that indicated race or political affiliation. While both African-American and white reviewers showed a preference for African-American students; African-American reviewers 73 percent to 27 percent, both Republican and Democratic reviewers favored applicants who shared their party identify by 80 percent. Stronger academic credentials were often ignored.

In another part of the study, 800 people participated in a “trust” game. They were told they could give a sum of money, either all, some, or none, to another player. The results suggested that race was not a factor in the decision while significantly more money was given if the other player shared the political identity of the giver.

The Stanford study also tries to answer the question; “why is this happening?” Dr. Iyengar believes that attitudes and responses to differences such as race and gender are controlled by social expectations of tolerance and civility while no such expectations exist for political differences. He goes on to state that words and actions of political leaders gives the exact opposite impression, that voicing hostility and acting in a discriminatory manner towards a political opponent is not only fine but in fact is the proper response.

I do not believe this is how our system of government, or society in general, is supposed to function. We, both citizens and lawmakers, need to do everything possible to reverse this trend. The Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act (NEMRA) is one tool.  

Increase In Unaffiliated Voters Not Just Nevada

September was National Voter Registration Month so I thought what better time to look at the national trend of voters registered with no party affiliation.

There are 31 states plus the District of Columbia that require voters to select party preference when registering to vote. Using the most recent available data (September 2013 and September 2014 if possible); 2013 numbers were not available in Kentucky and Utah while Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island did not have data for 2014 available on their web sites, the average percent of voters not registered in any political party is 26.7. The highest percentage is in Alaska where 53.8% of voters are unaffiliated while the lowest is Pennsylvania at 8.1%. The median is 23.3%. Nevada is at 19.1%.

How about the rate of change? Using the same data:

                                    Dem                Rep                  Unaffiliated

Average change          -0.3%               +0.3%              -.02%

Median change            -0.5%               -0.1%               +0.5%

Low                             -2.1% (NV)     -0.7% (CA)     -6.9% (ID)*                

High                            +4.7% (MD)    +5.9% (ID)      +2.2% (CA)

Nevada                        -2.1%               +0.4%              +1.5%

* Drop from 59.4% to 52.5%

I've highlighted the trend in Nevada over the past three months. We are not alone. This is a national trend that shows no signs of slowing down.

By passing the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act (NEMRA), our state has the opportunity to adjust to this new political reality. Legislators can demonstrate the belief that all voters are equally important, that their opinions and votes matter as they make the decisions that will guide Nevada into the future.

	Dem 9/13	Dem 9/14	Change	Rep 9/13	Rep 9/14	Change	NP 9/13	NP 9/14	Change
AK	14.3%	13.9%	-0.4%	27.3%	26.9%	-0.4%	53.1%	53.8%	0.7%
AZ	29.9%	29.1%	-0.8%	35.0%	34.6%	-0.4%	34.1%	35.5%	1.4%
CA	43.9%	43.4%	-0.5%	28.9%	28.2%	-0.7%	20.9%	23.1%	2.2%
CO	31.5%	30.7%	-0.8%	32.4%	32.5%	0.1%	34.8%	35.4%	0.6%
DE	47.7%	47.5%	-0.2%	28.3%	28.1%	-0.2%	24.0%	24.4%	0.4%
FL	40.1%	39.0%	-1.1%	35.6%	35.1%	-0.5%	21.6%	23.0%	1.4%
ID	7.6%	8.4%	0.8%	32.4%	38.3%	5.9%	59.4%	52.5%	-6.9%
IA	31.7%	31.2%	-0.5%	31.7%	32.2%	0.5%	36.4%	36.4%	0.0%
KS	25.0%	24.3%	-0.7%	44.6%	44.1%	-0.5%	29.8%	30.8%	1.0%
LA	47.6%	46.9%	-0.7%	27.7%	27.7%	0.0%	24.7%	25.4%	0.7%
ME	31.8%	32.0%	0.2%	27.1%	27.3%	0.2%	37.1%	36.8%	-0.3%
MD	55.8%	60.5%	4.7%	26.0%	28.0%	2.0%	16.6%	10.7%	-5.9%
NE	32.1%	32.2%	0.1%	47.9%	48.3%	0.4%	19.6%	20.1%	0.5%
NV	42.0%	39.9%	-2.1%	34.3%	34.7%	0.4%	17.6%	19.1%	1.5%
NH	27.3%	27.2%	-0.1%	30.2%	30.1%	-0.1%	42.4%	42.7%	0.3%
NJ	33.2%	32.9%	-0.3%	19.9%	19.8%	-0.1%	46.8%	47.2%	0.4%
NM	47.0%	47.0%	0.0%	31.0%	31.0%	0.0%	19.0%	19.0%	0.0%
NY	49.5%	49.6%	0.1%	24.2%	24.0%	-0.2%	20.4%	20.4%	0.0%
NC	42.6%	41.9%	-0.7%	30.7%	30.5%	-0.2%	26.4%	27.3%	0.9%
OK	45.5%	44.7%	-0.8%	42.4%	43.2%	0.8%	12.1%	12.1%	0.0%
OR	39.1%	38.4%	-0.7%	30.7%	30.4%	-0.3%	22.8%	23.5%	0.7%
PA	49.8%	49.6%	-0.2%	36.9%	36.7%	-0.2%	13.3%	8.1%	-5.2%
SD	35.2%	33.9%	-1.3%	45.7%	46.2%	0.5%	18.8%	19.4%	0.6%
WV	51.7%	49.7%	-2.0%	28.7%	28.8%	0.1%	17.6%	19.2%	1.6%
WY	21.0%	19.9%	-1.1%	64.4%	66.4%	2.0%	13.8%	12.8%	-1.0%
DC	75.7%	76.1%	0.4%	6.2%	6.1%	-0.1%	17.0%	16.7%	-0.3%
avg		38.1%	-0.3%		33.0%	0.3%		26.7%	-0.2%
median		38.7%	-0.5%		30.8%	-0.1%		23.3%	0.5%
min		8.4%	-2.1%		6.1%	-0.7%		8.1%	-6.9%
max		76.1%	4.7%		66.4%	5.9%		53.8%	2.2%