Independent Elector Movement | 2028 Presidential Election

Election of Independent Electors to the Electoral College improves national governance, reduces the polarization of society, minimizes the effect of big money on politics, and empowers voters. The Independent Elector movement grows one state at a time and can have an impact by the 2028 Presidential Election. No need to change the constitution. There are no downsides (unless you consider putting country over party to be a downside).

Time of Opportunity - an overview video (4:43 min)

Executive Summary:
The over-arching advantage of the Independent Elector method is that it promotes good governance through election a president more likely to unify our government and to reduce the polarizing impact of the two-party system. The Independent Elector method offers a constitutional, state-level path to reducing political polarization by restoring the Framers’ original vision for electing the President—through independent, community-chosen electors rather than party-controlled slates. Today’s two-party system and winner-take-all method of selecting Electors makes the votes of voters in red and blue states effectively irrelevant and pressurizes candidates to serve party interests over national interests. Under the Independent Elector model, voters in each congressional and senatorial district elect unpledged, non-party electors through open primaries and ranked-choice voting, choosing trusted local leaders based on judgment and integrity rather than ideology. These Electors deliberate, negotiate, and cast their presidential votes free from party control, creating incentives for cooperation, broad appeal, and compromise. Even if adopted by a single state, the Independent Elector model increases individual voter influence, strengthens the state’s national leverage, reduces the impact of money and partisanship, and encourages the election of presidents who can unite rather than divide the country.

Introduction

At present our society is highly polarized. Some people think we need to restore traditional values. Others think we are abandoning our noblest principles including the rule of law and respect for human dignity. Change is happening fast. Emotions run high. No one knows what the future will bring. Polarization is fed by the two-party system. The problems of the two-party system are not new, but recently they have been intensifying. Adopting the Independent Electors method for electing the president will go a long way toward healing our society and our government.

Although there is strong language exposing and attacking the two-party system, a basic premise of this site is that the two-party system is a systemic weakness in our democracy; it is not an indictment of the people or even party members as a whole. In order to function within society people have to play by society’s rules; it is the rules, not the people, that are the problem.

Thus the underlying problem that we are attempting to solve is that our government IS the two-party system. With few exceptions, in order to be elected to the House or Senate one must first be a candidate of one of the two major parties. With no exceptions, once elected a member must caucus with one of the two major parties. The two-party system is deeply entrenched. In the history of the United States only our first president – George Washington, has ever been elected without support of a major party.

As explained in depth by Katherine Gehl and Michel Porter, Political Parties maintain their control by demonizing the opposition party. Power to the parties thrives on political polarization. Polarized governance is poor governance. An issue resolved is an issue that cannot be used against the other party. This is not because partisans are diabolical, this is a manifestation of survival of the party best able to adapt within the two-party system. History demonstrates that parties that encourage fierce loyalty thrive. These are the unwritten rules of our political system.

The founding fathers puts checks and balances into the constitution to limit the power of each of the three branches of government, but as they did not anticipate political parties, there are no checks and balances that apply to political parties or that protect the rights of citizens who are not party members. Organizations such as Open Primaries, Veterans for All Voters, and Fair Vote seek to empower individual voters. These organizations use ballot initiatives and legal action to change the state primary and general election procedures so as to advance voter’s rights. Independent Electors takes inspiration from these initiatives. Open primaries and ranked choice voting are incorporated into the Independent Electors path to reform.

Overview

Election of the president was the only branch of government for which the method of election was specified in the constitution. Framers of the Constitution specified that the president would be elected by members on an electoral college composed of Electors chosen by the people. Even in this case, however, political parties have made the Electoral College into a "rubber stamp". In the two-party system of government the Electors are chosen by parties, not by the people. Although the ballots have the names of the party presidential candidates, in reality voters choose a slate of party-selected Electors who are pledged to vote for their party’s candidate.

In the Independent Elector method people elect Electors from their own House of Representatives and Senatorial electoral districts. Presumably Electors would be chosen based upon their record of civic responsibility, judgement, integrity, and the trust they inspire in their fellow citizens. Likely candidates would include civic-minded business leaders, educators, community activists, faith leaders, journalists, talk-show hosts, and retired politicians.

In contrast to a constitutional amendment, which requires approval of 38 states to be adopted, adoption of the Independent Elector method can be enacted by an individual state. Adoption of the Independent Elector method can have a positive impact as soon as it is enacted. As a baseline, consider that due to red-state-blue-state realities votes for president in 2/3rds of states are now completely irrelevant. On the other hand a vote for an Independent Elector counts toward election of one of the 538 presidential Electors. That vote is never irrelevant.

As to the influence of the state on national government, there is no downside and there is a small chance for a significant upside. If pledged Electors from other states are sufficient to elect the president, then citizens of the Independent Elector state are no worse off. In the event that neither major party has sufficient pledged Electors to secure the presidency, the Independent Electors will have power to negotiate to the benefit of the state and its people. Thus not only will the people of the state be empowered as individuals, but the state as a whole will have increased power within the national government.

Increased power to the state and to its people comes at the expense of power to the political parties and their partisans. Political parties can be expected to fight hard to preserve their power.

The state-run primary election would occur approximately one month after the petitions had been certified and the names of candidates made public and approximately one month prior to the general election. Names would be placed on the ballot in random order, listed only by the name.

During the one-month primary campaign candidates and their supporters would be free to use networks, cable, print media, social media, and other means to make their best case. Funding for the campaign would be completely transparent. Prior to sending out campaign messages, media outlets would be required to disclose the source of funding for those messages. “Shell organization” sponsors would be prohibited.

All voters would be eligible to vote in the primary. As election of Independent Electors is separate from the two-party system, voters could vote both for Independent Electors and in their political party’s primary election. Voting would be by Ranked Choice Voting; each voter would be allowed to vote for each of three Electors – representing their Representative and Senatorial districts. Candidates receiving the top four highest total would move on to the general election. Rules for campaign financing would be the same as for the primary election.

The general election – the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November – is held at the same date in all fifty states. Electoral candidates would be listed on the ballot identified only by name and in random order. Election would be by ranked choice voting – with preferences ranked 1 through 4.

Procedures and Schedule

In order to cast a wide net for potential Electors, it would be relatively easy to be considered as an Elector. A petition signed by 100 eligible voters would be sufficient to have a name entered in the primary election.

Resources

Once elected, Electors would have absolute freedom to cast their ballot for any person of their choice. Electors would be free to speak to anyone, to negotiate, to collaborate in any manner that they saw fit.

Electors would be entitled to reasonable compensation for their work but would not be employees of the state.

Electors would be given administrative staff, access to resources for communications, computer analysis, and internet access.

Electors would be provided with security in order to protect them from harassment or from unwanted influence of their votes.

Transparency - As a body of government, activities of Independent Electors would be completely open to the public. With the aid of computer and internet technology, all communication – whether oral, written or digital, both to and from Electors would be available to the public in real time.

Impact of Independent Electors on the presidential election

Here are three possible scenarios: Independent Electors play no role, Independent Electors cast the deciding votes, and Independent Electors choose the president.

No role – If pledged Electors are sufficient to elect the president, then Independent Electors play no role. The people of the state are no better off or worse off than they would have been had the electors been pledged.

Deciding role – If neither major party has sufficient pledged Electors to cast the deciding votes between the two major party candidates, both parties would need support of at least some of the Independent Electors to reach the required 270 Electoral votes. If the decision is not made by the Electoral College, then the decision moves to the House of Representatives where each state has one vote. Presumably that outcome could be predicted, so the only way that the minority party could win the presidency would be to reach a deal with sufficient Independent Electors. Presumably the majority party might counter-offer. Negotiation, not intimidation, would be the path to election of the president.

Choosing the president – If there are 270 or more Independent Electors, then it would be mathematically possible for Independent Electors to choose anyone they wanted for president. Such an event would require 270 or more independent individuals to work together. If no presidential candidate would have 270 or more Electoral votes, then the House of Representatives, voting as individual states, may select from the top five highest vote getters. It is difficult to speculate on all of the options; it would seem likely that two of the top five vote getters would be major party candidates. Still, unlike pledged electors, Representatives are not pledged to a single candidate.

The takeaway of such speculation is that election of any number of Independent Electors is likely to have a de-polarizing effect on selection of the president. Compromise and negotiation are likely to play a larger role than demonization and blame. Once elected, Pledged Electors play no further role as they are forbidden by law to change their votes, so it is the Independent Electors that will be making the decisions.

Advantages of the Independent Elector Model

The over-arching advantage of the Independent Elector method is to promote good governance through election a president more likely to unify our government and to reduce the polarizing impact on our society of the two-party system.

Other advantages to adopting the Independent Electors method include:

The influence of money on the choice of president is greatly reduced as corporations, special interest groups, foreign powers, and billionaires would have to distribute their resources over the 538 primaries and as the identity of Electors would not be known until the date of the general election.
Possibilities of outside influence are further reduced as Electors have no power after casting their votes in the Electoral College.
The short election process avoids the polarizing effects of a never-ending campaign for presidency.
In contrast to the party primary elections which occur 5 to 9 months prior to the general election, Independent Electors can base their decisions on the most up-to-date information -including information from first two weeks of December.
The impact of votes of an individual are increased compared to the present system, as in the present system the impact of an individual vote for an Elector is diluted by the impacts of “super-delegate” voters in political party conventions.

Organization

The Independent Electors Movement is a ground-up or grass roots movement. For the people to have power we have to take it for ourselves. The State Discussion Groups page is intended to be a forum in which civic-minded individuals have the opportunity to find one another -a meet-and-greet, a forum where people may share ideas, make plans, and hopefully make connections that will grow into organizations. There are no rules imposed by this site as to how to make that happen. It is up to us.