The Republican Party of West Virginia has elected to keep its primary elections closed to party members only, despite these elections being paid for by taxpayers and are the most critical stage of the public elections process.
During last weekend’s GOP Winter Meeting, the party had an opportunity to re-open its primary elections after it decided in 2024 to bar independent voters from participating. At the time, Republican Delegate John Overington said:
“I think we would welcome those people to become registered Republicans. There’s no reason that if they believe in our platform and they believe in what we stand for why they shouldn’t be Republicans.”
Basically, it another way of saying what political parties have long argued – if you want an equal vote, join a party.
Yet there is no evidence that every independent voter who previously chose a Republican ballot believed in the entire party platform. However, Republicans hold most elected seats in the state, so the GOP primaries are the most critical elections.
Republicans hold 91% of state House seats. They hold all but 2 state Senate seats. It may seem like Republicans make up a majority of registered voters. But they don’t. They make up a plurality (42%), but registered independents make up a quarter of the electorate.
Among these independent voters is former U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin, who previously served in Congress as a Democrat but changed his affiliation to independent. In 2025, he spoke out frequently for nonpartisan primary reform, from appearing on Bill Maher to CNN.
"You have a Democrat and a Republican business -- it's billions and billions of dollars," he said on Bill Maher.
They close it down. They control the primaries. They can basically control who you are voting for."
He added: "We have to change the system to allow people to truly choose who they want."
Keeping primary elections closed to party members gives the leaders of a single party and special interests aligned with outsized influence over election outcomes, allows them to weaponize elections against their members to keep them in line, and denies independent voters equal voting rights and meaningful representation.
Why Are Oregon State Officials Misleading Voters on Two Open Primaries Initiatives?
Oregon will vote on two ballot initiatives in November, one that would change the state constitution to make it illegal to conduct taxpayer-funded closed primaries, and the other changes state law to open primaries to the state’s 1.1 million registered independent voters.
Both initiatives have cleared the verification stage to collect petition signatures for ballot certification and have plenty of support among voters.
The problem? Voters may get confused when they go to the ballot box because of misleading ballot language.
The ballot title for the constitutional amendment drafted by the Oregon Department of Justice’s attorney says, “Amends Constitution: Changes general election nomination processes for most partisan offices: single primary ballot; top two advance.”
The title for the change to primary law says ““Changes general election nomination processes for most partisan offices: single primary ballot; top two advance.”
Neither one states the purpose of its initiative, which is to open the state’s primary elections to more than a million voters who are registered independent of a political party and cannot participate in these taxpayer-funded elections because of the state’s closed primary system.
This has raised objections from many in Oregon, including 3 former governors, 2 former secretaries of state (the state’s chief elections office), the statewide chamber of commerce, and independent reform advocates.
The former governors who have objected to this language are Barbara Roberts, Ted Kulongoski, and Kate Brown.
Beyond omitting the measures’ central effect, the various objectors wrote, the wording is ‘flawed,’ ‘reflects … a misunderstanding’ of the measures, is full of inaccuracies, ‘biased against the measure’ and ‘must be amended.’”
The proposed constitutional amendment makes closed taxpayer-funded primary elections illegal in Oregon. This means parties can still conduct their own closed, private nomination processes, but they have to pay for it.
On its own, this does not create a Top Two system since there are other avenues that candidates can advance to the general election, including through the public open primary, closed party primaries, and the petition process for independent/third party candidates.
Yet the ballot language for the amendment says, “top two advance,” This is misleading.
The second initiative is the nonpartisan Top Two measure that allows all voters and candidates to participate on a single ballot and the top two vote-getters move on to the general election. This system is already in place in Washington and California.
But the language makes it sound like it is no different than the proposed constitutional amendment and doesn’t even clarify that it is not an amendment but a change to state law.
In Oregon, there isn’t much room provided for ballot measure titles and captions. The limit is 15 words, along with a 25-word max summary for what a yes and no vote means. Still, critics across the political spectrum say the DOJ lawyer should have done a better job,
Especially since one of the ballot titles is not even close to being correct, and neither make it clear that the initiatives are meant to ensure independent voters have equal voting rights in elections.
It begs the question – why the misleading ballot titles?
From California to Missouri, Republicans and Democrats Will Make and Break the Rules
These types of concerns over ballot language, though, are something independent reformers have to deal with all the time, whether they are trying to pass systemic reforms into law or prevent partisan power grabs.
In Missouri, Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins admitted he wrote prejudicial ballot language for a veto referendum challenging mid-cycle gerrymandering, but will not go so far as to call it “insufficient” or “unfair.”
Instead, Hoskins’ attorney told Cole County Circuit Judge Brian Stumpe that while there is agreement that the language should be revised, the original language is “defensible.”
In short, the veto referendum that is the target of partisan shenanigans in Missouri would repeal HB 1, the mid-cycle congressional gerrymander that carves up Kansas City in order to ensure the GOP one additional safe House seat.
Right now, Republicans control 6 out of the state’s 8 congressional seats. The new map gives them 7 seats that lean their way, potentially reducing the Democrats’ presence in the congressional delegation to 1 seat or 12.5% of the districts.
The current ballot summary for the veto referendum asks voters if they approve of HB 1, which Hoskins wrote:
[R]epeals Missouri’s existing gerrymandered congressional plan that protects incumbent politicians, and replaces it with new congressional boundaries that keep more cities and counties intact, are more compact, and better reflect statewide voting patterns?”
It sounds like the state is ending a gerrymander, instead of making it worse. But this is also a similar tactic used by California Democrats when writing Prop 50 in 2025 by saying their gerrymander “protects democracy” and supports “independent redistricting.”
Prop 50 suspended an independent congressional map approved unanimously by the state’s independent redistricting commission (by Democrats, Republicans, and independents) and replaced it with a gerrymander that gives Democrats 92% of the seats.
The same people who are elected under a party banner make the rules that determine how much power their party has over the process. It’s like letting a baseball team call their own balls and strikes.
But the system allows it. Back in 2017, the Democratic National Committee – faced with a lawsuit from Bernie Sanders supporters – argued in court that the party has every right to ignore primary results and put in their own candidates.
And the court agreed, writing:
To the extent Plaintiffs wish to air their general grievances with the DNC or its candidate selection process, their redress is through the ballot box, the DNC's internal workings, or their right of free speech — not through the judiciary."”
The same ballot box that benefits the DNC in Democratic-controlled states and the RNC in Republican-controlled states, because of closed primary rules and gerrymandering and other tactics to manipulate elections.
Quick Takeaways
Former U.S. Rep. Mary Peltola, the first Democrat to be elected to the U.S. House in Alaska since 1973, is running for U.S. Senate this year and stands a better chance of winning compared to just 6 years ago when incumbent U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan last ran for re-election. This is because the state’s nonpartisan Top Four primary has created a more competitive election system that incentivizes fewer extreme candidates.
Gallup reports independent voters reached a new record-high in 2025 at 45% of the electorate, surpassing the previous record that was held in 2023 and 2024 (43%). Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z are breaking historical trends by not only remaining independent the older they get but are in general independent in much greater numbers.
While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail....
People Not Politicians (PNP) submitted over 305,000 signatures last week to freeze a congressional gerrymander passed by the Missouri Legislature in September. However, state officials are doing everything they can to pretend this citizen revolt isn’t happening....
Things looked like they could get even more chaotic this week in the mid-cycle gerrymandering arms race between the two major parties as the Indiana Senate took up a new congressional map to give Republicans an even greater electoral advantage in the state. But Indiana Senate Republicans this week put their foot down and declared that they want no part in this race to the bottom....
A new statewide poll conducted by the Independent Voter Project finds California’s independent voters overwhelmingly support the state’s nonpartisan primary system and express broad dissatisfaction with the direction of state politics....
Missouri state officials have pulled out all the stops to prevent a veto referendum from getting on the ballot that would overturn a mid-cycle gerrymander. This includes writing a ballot summary that makes it sound like the veto referendum is trying to protect gerrymandering in the state....
Shawn Griffiths
