Since its founding in 2017, Election Reformers Network has been a leader in developing policies to strengthen U.S. democracy and reform systems which reduce trust or create conflicts of interest in the election ecosystem. Below are the reports, briefs, and resources which are the culmination of the original research that informs our program portfolio.
This report summarizes the impact of the Electoral Count Reform Act on state law and provides six recommendations on what states need to look for—and potentially change.
We must remove partisanship from election administration, say voters of all political stripes in a national poll commissioned by Election Reformers Network. The survey asked people’s views on our election system and on changes aimed at bolstering voter trust; 71% believe candidates for election official positions should be required to have experience running elections.
Watchdogs and redistricting experts filed an amicus brief to guide courts in assessing political gerrymandering, using the standard authored by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan. New Mexico's current court challenge provided the case study.
Adopting best practices from other countries is an opportunity to buttress policies and procedures that make US elections free and fair and draw inspiration from others facing the same challenges.
The election certification process was thrown into the partisan fray in 2020 and 2022. ERN has conducted twin studies aimed at comparing the certification process domestically and abroad so that we can glean best practices and keep this important process neutral.
Although most secretaries of state perform exemplary public service, party allegiances built into these positions make the United States a global outlier in election administration and create risks that need to be addressed.
This in-depth look at the Canadian model of election administration explains how delegating authority to independent professionals overcame widespread fraud and established a system that won the trust of voters.
This presidential election reform concept would end winner-take-all for the electoral college votes (which is not in the Constitution). Instead, states would allocate their electoral votes proportionally to the top two vote-getters in the state.
This joint report by ERN and the Bipartisan Policy Center examines why partisanship has been a long-standing issue in U.S. election administration, how the issue is getting worse with shifting political dynamics, and which solutions can reverse these trends.
The Carter Center joins with ERN to release this joint report on how proven models for impartiality in redistricting and the judicial system can be used to ensure that our election leaders are independent, professional, and accountable.
As a result of the decentralized nature of elections in the United States, election administration structures vary greatly state-by-state. In ten states the state-level leadership is the responsibility of an election board or commission. These types of boards, if structured correctly, can reduce concerns about partisanship in election certification processes.
In 33 states, the chief election official position is held by the secretary of state (or other state officer) who is elected in partisan elections and takes office with allegiance to a political party. No other democracy in the world selects its most senior election officials this way.
The nation is watching Wisconsin as a state Supreme Court race with major implications for democratic outcomes—at both state and national levels—becomes an all-out spending war on behalf of the liberal and conservative candidates. No one expects the record-breaking spending or heated partisan rhetoric to die down until the race in this crucial swing state is decided.
States have many different models for running elections. This short guide (with map) breaks down where elections are run by an individual (such as a Secretary of State), a board or commission, or a combination of the two.
In the 2022 cycle, 28 states held elections to select their chief election official (usually the secretary of state). At least 33 candidates for these statewide offices ran while questioning or denying the results of the 2020 presidential election — raising questions about whether they would conduct their work impartially if elected.
Watchdogs and redistricting experts filed an amicus brief to guide courts in assessing political gerrymandering, using the standard authored by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan. New Mexico's current court challenge provided the case study.
As election administration comes under increasing scrutiny from both sides of the political spectrum, an increasing number of researchers, scholars, lawyers, organizations, writers, and editorial boards have come out in favor of the concept of "impartial election administration."
Voter enthusiasm, recent bipartisanship in Congress, and an unclear political future create an opportunity to reform our systems that should not be passed by.
This groundbreaking Ropes & Gray legal landscape study of U.S states found that few, if any, have adequate legal provisions to constrain partisan endorsements, fundraising or related actions by election officials.
Here in America we don’t have the same range of parties as in the U.K. — in part because our Congress is undersized, with only one-seventh the number of representatives per citizen. But we do have political groupings that have trouble gaining representation in proportion to their share of the population.
This report compares constitutional amendment legislation in five states aimed at blocking partisan gerrymandering and changing how redistricting is done. The states include Ohio, Colorado, Michigan, Missouri, and Utah.
In this hyper-partisan era, states must take steps to ensure that: a) current officials are protected from threats and intimidation; b) future election officials will act impartially; and c) voters are confident that election administrators are doing their jobs without partisan bias. This ERN policy brief addresses how, including model legislation.
ERN Executive Director Kevin Johnson speaks to the Role of Social Innovation in Democracy Conference hosted by Stanford Social Innovation Review. This conference took place March 16–18, 2023.
With partisan tensions running high and trust in elections low, it's crucial that voters and journalists are aware of the procedures that election administrators and the courts have in place to fairly resolve disputes. Understanding these steps can help ensure that results are broadly accepted as legitimate, even when...