True in 2014, True Now – Hyper Partisanship Standing In The Way of Progress

In an update to their 2014 study, “The Next America: Boomers, Millennials, and the Looming Generational Showdown,” to be released this week, the Pew Research Center along with their former executive vice president Paul Taylor present data that should not surprise anyone. The hyper-partisan divide infecting our political structure is not only still active, it may have gotten worse.

Some highlights:

The use of partisan ideology as criteria for personal relationships is increasing. Added to this is an increasing level of distrust, denial of opposing facts, and doubt of motives and love of country. The authors observe “It’s as if they belong not to rival parties but alien tribes.”

The two major parties are becoming more demographically homogeneous. As the country grows less white and social tolerance gains acceptance among the younger yet largest generation, the shrinking party bases are becoming less inclusive. The Republican Party base is now whiter, older, more religious, and socially conservative. In contrast, the Democratic Party base is younger, racially diverse, secular, and more acceptant of social differences. This homogeneity is further highlighted in the growing generational gap in voting trends.

 Partisan beliefs continue to be a major and growing consideration in determining where we chose to live, who we chose as friends, who we marry, and where we get our information.

As the partisan divide becomes wider, more voters are choosing to abandon political parties in general. While this trend is present in all generations, it is most prevalent among the millennial generation, those between the ages of 18 and 34. This becomes more important since this generation is now the largest. As I post each month, this is true in Nevada where the percentage among this age group registered to vote as Non-Partisan is 10 percent higher than the overall state percentage.

Those wanting elected officials to collaborate, work together, and compromise are the new “silent majority”. However, in this age of social media and the accompanying pontification, there is no leader able to overcome the volume of the hyper-partisan extremes.

Election turnout plays a major role in allowing this partisan divide to survive. Historically, older voters tend to vote in non-presidential years in far greater numbers that younger voters. With ideological extremes dominating, this has created the large swings we have witnessed; a Democratic president re-elected and a strongly conservation congress maintaining a majority on the national level and a shift to the right in state governments

I posted two articles highlighting the growing partisan divide in 2014. Those posts are available here and here. As shown in this updated work by Pew Research and Paul Taylor, this divide is widening, negatively impacting our political systems and overall society.

The Nevada legislature can take a step to reverse this polarizing trend when they next meet in February, 2017 by enacting the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act. 

Nine States and Washington, D.C. Share a Spot on the Political Stage

Georgia, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and the District of Columbia. These nine states and our nation’s capital currently share a place on the political stage.

Nineteen. That is the number of bills dealing with the implementation of ranked choice / instant runoff voting (RCV / IRV) currently under consideration in the nine state legislatures and Washington D.C. city council. Voters in Maine are not waiting for the legislation. A ballot initiative implementing RCV / IRV for all state and federal elected offices except President of the United States is on the ballot this November.

Legislators in nine states and the District of Columbia city council realize that just talking about the heightened level of political polarization does not solve the problem. They realize that to effectively govern, to do the job they were elected to do, requires people with opposing views to work together, respectfully listen to all opinions, and then develop solutions to the problems facing their constituents. To create the environment where that can take place takes action. They have not just talked. They have acted.

 In 2017 when the next regular session of the Nevada legislature convenes, state legislators can join the ranks of those who choose action. By enacting the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act of 2017 (NEMRA – 2017), lawmakers will address the issues of:

•         Political polarization
•          Low voter turnout
•          Strategic voting
•          Voter dissatisfaction  

NEMRA – 2017 will also contribute to solving another major problem facing Nevada’s elections. Our voting equipment and software is old and nearing obsolescence. Both will need to be replaced in the very near future. By eliminating at least $3 – 4 million from the cost of administering elections, NEMRA – 2017 will allow county governments and the legislature to redirect those funds towards this critical need.

Nine and nineteen. That is only a piece of election related legislation pending in the states. At present there are 567 bills dealing with issues such as absentee ballots, voter registration, internet voting, voting by mail, types of primary elections, and the creation of committees and task forces to look into voting-related topics pending in various states.

The issue of election reform has the attention of state legislators and voters. Nevada legislators do not have to wait until 2017 to act.  A bill draft request (BDR) can be filed now. 

Will Voters in South Dakota and Maine Set the Stage for the Nevada Legislature?

In November 2016, voters in South Dakota and Maine will have the opportunity to change the way elections are held in their state. The changes, placed on the ballot by initiative petition, recognize the growing numbers of voters not affiliated with either the Democratic or Republican Party and the importance of ending the hyper-partisanship that dominates much of the political landscape.

In South Dakota, voters will decide whether to change the state’s Constitution, replacing the current partisan primary elections with a non-partisan primary and general election. Under the proposed constitutional amendment, all candidates will be listed on the primary ballot without party affiliation or status as an independent. All voters, regardless of party affiliation or lack thereof will be allowed to vote. Party affiliation or status as an independent will also not be listed on the general election ballot. The right of any persons to belong to a political party is maintained as is the right of political parties to endorse or support a candidate or candidates. Public funds may not be used by the parties for these purposes.  Currently, 21 percent of South Dakota voters are not registered in either the Democratic or Republican Party. The Democratic Party currently has 33 percent voter share while the Republican Party has 46 percent.

In Maine, 44 percent (39 Independent / 5 other) of registered voters do not identify as either Democratic or Republican.  Voter share for the major parties currently is 33 percent and 23 percent respectively. This measure has roots in the state legislature. The initiative was started by a current and former member of that body. Supporters gathered enough signatures so voters will decide whether or not to eliminate the state’s closed primary system and instead use a single general election using Rank Choice / Instant Run-off voting (RCV / IRV).  This is similar to the proposal now being presented to Nevada legislators.

It’s too soon to know what voters in South Dakota and Maine will decide. Enough voters signified support by signing the petitions placing the measures on the ballot.

The growing trend of dissatisfaction with the two major political parties is not likely to be reversed in the near future. To successfully govern may require elected officials to adopt systems that create an environment where collaboration and cooperation are rewarded by increased voter approval. The 2017 session of the Nevada legislature can do its part, by enacting the Nevada Election Modernization and Reform Act – 2017 (NEMRA – 2017). 

2015 Voter Registration – A Good Year for GOP and Non-Partisan, Not True for Democrats

By all measurements, across all demographics, 2015 was not a good year for the Democratic Party in Nevada. While the Republican Party and Non-Partisan gained voter share, the Democratic Party lost share. In some areas, the loss was over one percent. Conversely, Republican gains also topped the one percent level. Minor parties also saw a loss. Figures are from December, 2014 and December, 2015 Secretary of State voter registration statistics.

State-wide Percent Voter Share

2014			2015	Diff
D	39.71		39.08	-0.64
R	34.53		35.07	0.54
NP	19.33		19.56	0.24
O	6.43		6.29	-0.14

 Clark County Percent Voter Share

2014			2015	Diff
D	43.46		42.88	-0.58
R	30.53		31.05	0.52
NP	20.02		20.24	0.22
O	5.99		5.82	-0.17

Washoe County Percent Voter Share

2014			2015	Diff
D	35.53		35.21	-0.32
R	38.38		38.45	0.07
NP	18.72		19.14	0.42
O	7.36		7.20	-0.16

Rural Counties Percent Voter Share

2014			2015	Diff
D	26.28		25.10	-1.18
R	49.70		50.83	1.13
NP	16.61		16.68	0.07
O	7.41		7.39	-0.02

18 – 34 Year Old Percent Voter Share

2014			2015	Diff
D	37.98		37.65	-0.33
R	24.62		25.23	0.61
NP	29.18		29.20	0.02
O	8.22		7.92	-0.30

55+ Year Old Percent Voter Share

2014			2015	Diff
D	40.89		40.25	-0.64
R	40.01		40.61	0.60
NP	13.84		13.94	0.10
O	5.26		5.20	-0.06

Assembly Districts Percent Voter Share

	Average Diff	High	Low	Note
D	-0.54	0.22	-1.73	Only 3 districts gained share
R	0.47	2.28	-1.05	Only 4 districts lost share
NP	0.23	1.17	-1.19	Only 6 districts lost share
O	-0.15	0.33	-0.72	Only 8 districts gained share

Senate Districts Percent Voter Share

	Average Diff	High	Low	Note
D	-0.55	-0.24	-0.95	All districts lost share. Low in 2 districts
R	0.45	1.17	-0.52	Only 2 districts lost share
NP	0.24	0.88	-0.18	Only 4 districts lost share
O	-0.14	0.29	-0.42	Only 2 districts gained share

Congressional District Percent Voter Share

	Average Diff	High	Low	Note
D	-0.53	-0.40	-0.86	CD1 & 2 shared low. High CD4
R	0.43	0.72	0.23	High CD4 Low CD2
NP	0.24	0.33	0.10	High CD3 Low CD1
O	-0.14	-0.09	-0.20	High CD4 Low CD3

These figures are not surprising. Monthly analyses posted on this blog have consistently shown growth of voters registered as Non-Partisan. While the monthly data has shown both the Democratic and Republican Parties losing voter share; the GOP has shown infrequent gains, recent voter file maintenance has benefited the GOP.

The Presidential Caucuses are one month away, the primary election a mere five. Will the campaigns foster interest that equates to increased partisan voter registration? I’ll be tracking. If registration in the parties increases significantly, will that result in higher primary election turn-out? We’ll know on June 14^th.