Democracy Reform
Primer Series

There are many potential administrative benefits to voting by mail, including reducing wait times and enhancing voter satisfaction. Advocates have long claimed that expanding vote-by-mail options and especially moving to universal vote-by-mail, increases overall political participation. In particular, it is thought to expand the participation of more marginalized political groups like minorities, younger voters, and voters who face accessibility challenges to voting in person.

The federal bureaucracy is perceived to be bloated and inefficient. Critics contend that career civil servants are not responsive to the president’s demands, and it is difficult to fire poor performers. Converting a cadre of mid- to high-level career civil servants to at-will employment status would increase the bureaucracy’s political responsiveness and improve agency performance.

The Electoral College directs candidate efforts and attention to a small set of states. This tendency has increased dramatically over time because of increased political polarization and improved polling. It has reduced political participation in neglected states and biased some policies over which the president has more control. The simpler National Popular Vote system would eliminate these negative consequences and equalize the importance of voters across America.

Many important and popular pieces of legislation that have majority support are not enacted because their sponsors lack the votes to override a potential Senate filibuster. By changing how the filibuster is practiced, or eliminating it altogether, the Senate would no longer be hostage to relentless obstruction and would instead be more productive and responsive to the will of the people.

Despite their importance, and increased relevance to the average citizen, turnout in local elections is startlingly low, often less than 20%. Researchers point to local elections held synchronously with national elections that on average yield almost double the voter turnout and produce more representative candidates.

By injecting politics into the branch of government for which independence and impartiality are indispensable, judicial elections threaten to undermine the rule of law. Eliminating judicial elections and substituting bipartisan nominating commissions would depoliticize and restore confidence in state judiciaries.

Far too often, redistricting plans are gerrymandered, leaving politicians less accountable to the citizens they represent. How can we ensure that maps are drawn fairly and that districts reflect what people want? How can we minimize or even eliminate the manipulation of districts for political ends?