A “Fix-The-Rules” Focus Can Give Us Hope for America in 2026
As 2026 dawns, another year of all-consuming politics has begun in America. This year, two parties with bitterly divergent conceptions of the nation will fight for control of Congress, statehouses, and local offices across the country. These contests will take place against the backdrop of shifting constitutional, legal, and ethical boundaries, as the Trump administration undermines long-standing democratic norms and institutions.
Amidst all this, where can we find hope? For me, the answer comes in loving democracy itself.
The best way to illustrate this perspective is with an analogy to sports, where fans love their team with complete abandon, but also care about the game itself.
And sometimes caring about a sport means accepting that it needs to change. Most fans have welcomed new rules to increase fairness, accuracy, and transparency, such as challenges and video reviews of referees’ calls. Fans have also seen how more fundamental changes, like the three-point shot in basketball, can enrich the competition.
I believe it’s possible, even necessary, for Americans to simultaneously want their side to win and deeply love democracy itself. And right now, I believe loving democracy means wanting its rules to change.
Democracy is often taught in school in ways that make it seem immutable, like a venerable grandfather clock, to be admired but never changed. But nations change the rules of their democracies, just as sports leagues change the rules of their games. And changes in the rules of a democracy can make a big difference in politics and culture.
Right now, what’s needed most for American democracy are reforms that reduce the power of political insiders and enable citizens to reassert their right to self-government.
Politicians shouldn’t choose their voters
One glaring example of rules that need changing are those around the drawing of districts for Congressional and state legislative elections. Most states give this power to politicians in the state legislature, who have a direct interest in how those lines are drawn. Typically, they gerrymander district lines to benefit their party and their fellow incumbents.
Legislative gerrymandering creates a host of ills. It deprives voters of choice, reduces accountability, empowers political extremes, increases voter cynicism, and blocks policies large majorities want. In part because of gerrymandering, more than half of states are now under long-term trifecta control by one party; 30 years ago, that number was just six states.
Gerrymandering is also among the reasons so few seats in Congress are competitive; according to the Cook Political Report, the number of competitive “tossup” races plummeted from 57 in 1996 to just 17 in 2026.
Right now, I believe loving democracy means wanting its rules to change.
The ongoing gerrymandering wars, triggered by President Trump’s demands that Republican states draw more red districts, will further decrease fairness and competition. This wave of gerrymandering also illustrates why this problem has to be fixed for all states at the same time, otherwise fear of “unilateral disarmament” will always block progress.
Congress has all the authority it needs to set fair standards for all states, and good legislation has been introduced by Senator Amy Klobuchar that would do just that. Passing the Redistricting Reform Act, which includes a ban on mid-decade redistricting, is a critical change that must be pursued doggedly over the coming years.
Political insiders shouldn’t run our elections
While redistricting reform has to be approached with a long-term perspective, other rule changes can be won at the state level sooner, addressing the same basic problem of insider control over elections. Most of the 26 states with citizen ballot initiatives give control over that process to political insiders such as attorneys general and secretaries of state, some of whom have used their power to prevent fair votes on politically sensitive issues. In 2026, citizens in states such as Arkansas, Missouri, and Nebraska may have the chance to approve measures that protect the initiative process from such manipulation.
Secretaries of state, in particular, ought to be beacons of neutrality, not insider agents for one side. The organization I run, Election Reformers Network, has proposed a range of options for changing the secretary of state position to reduce risk of partisan manipulation.
The two-party duopoly shouldn’t monopolize the system
America also needs to rethink the many rules that have created the most rigid two-party system of any democracy in the world. Having more parties in a legislature can improve problem-solving by enabling different coalitions and reducing us/them polarization. States should make it easier for third parties to access the ballot, and they should not give preference to major party members in election administration functions.
In addition, states and Congress should consider shifting away from winner-take-all, single-member districts in favor of districts that elect several representatives on the basis of their proportion of the vote, such as proportional ranked choice voting. This approach (embodied in the Fair Representation Act) would enable representation of America’s many excluded political minorities – think rural progressives, urban conservatives, and independents. This reform also greatly reduces the problem of partisan gerrymandering, since electing multiple representatives in proportion to their share of the vote makes it unfeasible to completely block the election of candidates favored by a minority of voters.
There is no shortage of good options for changes to make the “grandfather clock” of American democracy work better. To the list of reforms briefly summarized here, many more good ideas can be added. Change won’t come easily, but more and more Americans are “feeling the love” and joining efforts to advocate for reform.
The best source of hope for our country doesn’t come from one side in the fight, but from fair rules that make the system work better and more peacefully, for all.