Susan von SeggernChad Peace of the Independent Voter Project sat down this week with Molly Ruland on her podcast, What Do We Do Next?, a show that asks the question most people in politics are quietly avoiding: if the system isn't working, what do ordinary Americans actually do about it?
Molly's audience isn't looking for party spin. They want honest answers about why things feel so broken and what, if anything, can be done. With nearly half of all Americans now identifying as independent voters, she wanted to understand why the country keeps getting more partisan, not less.
As the legal advisor behind the Independent Voter Project, Chad has spent years making the case – all the way to the Supreme Court – that the current primary system is the root cause of the polarization most Americans are fed up with.
The conversation covered the structural reasons closed primaries produce extreme candidates, why political parties are private organizations that nonetheless control publicly funded elections, and the legal question Chad has put to the Supreme Court three times: if primaries are an integral stage of the election process, can the state legally exclude voters who choose not to join a private party?
Chad also made the case that voter disengagement doesn't weaken the system – it strengthens it. When participation shrinks, a smaller and more ideologically motivated slice of the electorate gains outsized power. The answer, he argued, isn't just getting money out of politics, but making every dollar less effective by forcing candidates to compete for a broader, less predictable electorate.
The episode also previewed what's next for the Independent Voter Project: a Top Four nonpartisan primary initiative for California, modeled on Alaska's system, that would advance four candidates to the general election regardless of party affiliation.
The episode is available on Spotify, Apple Podcasts and whatdowedonext.substack.com. Listen below.
