What a Springfield congregation taught me about our broken elections By Danielle Allen, Ph.D. A few years ago, a service and community meeting at the Spring of Hope Church in Springfield gave me the insight and fire to begin a new journey of democracy renovation in Massachusetts—one focused on making sure our voices matter, and are heard, by the people we elect to represent us. The room was full of engaged, thoughtful people who were deeply invested in their community. They raised the issues on their minds—safety, schools, housing, asthma rates, and much more. But when I asked them if they’d be voting in their upcoming elections, their collective answer startled me. In the middle of an election year, many told me they didn’t see the point of voting because there was no choice on the ballot. Races with single incumbent candidates and no challengers dominated the ballot, leaving these incredibly engaged citizens to wonder why they should even show up. Voting for the lone default winners of uncompetitive races, they said, wasn’t a great use of their time. And, of course, they were right. Data show Massachusetts has the fewest competitive elections in America. Since 2014, 51% of our elections have had no real contest at all: one candidate with no opposition in the primary or the general. In 2024, that number climbed to 61%. Six out of 10 races were decided before a single vote was counted. And for statewide races, that lack of competition is often by design. Competitors can be kicked off a primary ballot if they don’t receive a particular level of support from delegates at their political party convention. Think about what that means. Uncompetitive primaries and groups of political insiders, more often than not, decide who represents you, your family, and your neighbors, long before the rest of us ever see a ballot. And the solutions to our ever-increasing list of problems—affordability, housing, healthcare, transportation, schools, the environment—are ignored by people in power who don’t feel driven enough to deliver. |
|
Super Tuesday presidential primary election ballots in Massachusetts. (Wikimedia Commons) |
|
That’s why I, along with dozens of activists, community leaders, grassroots organizers, and hundreds of volunteers, am working on Question 3, which will be on your general election ballot in November, to implement all-party primaries in state legislative, statewide, and federal congressional races. All-party primaries make elections more competitive, open the door for fresh voices, and make politicians actually listen to the people they serve. Every voter would get the same ballot. Every eligible candidate, regardless of party, would have access to the preliminary election, and every voter, regardless of party affiliation, would be able to vote in every race. The top two finishers of each race then advance to the general election. It’s a familiar system, as Massachusetts cities and towns run their municipal elections this way. Every voter gets a voice at every stage of the election, including independent or unenrolled voters. Our elected officials are incentivized to communicate to, and deliver for, all of us. A democracy that has to answer to all of its people, not just the ones already inside the tent, is the strongest one we can build. Parties and candidates accountable only to themselves get weak, get complacent, stop listening. Accountability is what makes us stronger. Research bears this out. Officials elected under all-party primaries tend to be younger and more representative of the communities they serve, both by race and by gender, because entrenched incumbents who never face a real challenge rarely make room for new leadership. Real competition changes who runs, who wins, and who stays. Independent research has also found that open, top-two primaries are associated with higher turnout among voters of color, in both the primary and the general election. That tracks with what I heard in Springfield. Officials who never face a real contest can serve for decades without ever having to reflect the community around them. Real competition brings in new leadership. It gives the whole community a say, and it produces a legislature that looks more like the state it represents. Communities of color, immigrant communities, working people without a lobbyist or a party title – we are disproportionately the ones left out before the process even starts. A democracy that only works for the people already on the inside is a gate, not a democracy. And the solutions to the problems facing us in Massachusetts continue to be woefully neglected because of it. I think back often to those pews at Spring of Hope Church—to people who showed up and spoke honestly about their role in our democracy and our elections. This November, Massachusetts voters will have a chance to fix that winner-by-default ballot. They will decide whether our elections are run by insiders or by We The People. I hope you'll join us in voting YES on Question 3 for all-party primaries—not because this is a silver bullet solution that fixes everything, but because it makes every other fight worth fighting a little more winnable. When elections are competitive, and every voter has a voice at every stage, the people closest to the problems finally get a real shot at being heard. That's the democracy Massachusetts deserves. Let's build it together. |
|
|
|
|
