Claim Democracy
Claim Democracy encourages networking and collaboration among national, state and local democracy groups in order to build support for and strengthen a national infrastructure for a pro-democracy movement within the United States.  Its most significant accomplishment thus far has been our November 2003 and 2007 Claim Democracy conferences, which brought together representatives of more than 100 organizations and more than 500 people for intensive private meetings and public dialogue inWashington, D.C. In light of recent election administration problems and high-profile obstacles to fair elections in the public interest, its major goal for 2008 is the Democracy SoS (Secretary of State) project, designed to develop a comprehensive agenda for action by Secretaries of State and other elected officials who influence election policy.

The vision for Claim Democracy is to help create and support a network of state-based organizations that work to secure, enhance and exercise the right vote through a range of reforms and activities. Rather than exclusively focus on one particular reform or another, these organizations would be able to coordinate and pool resources to advocate one of a number of reforms that meet clear pro-democracy goals. Examples include: expanding the electorate, increasing citizen participation, providing fair representation, promoting better political debate, freeing voters to support their candidate of choice and supporting equality in the political process. Potential activities include plans to:
  • Establish a new website with a range of information about pro-democracy issues, blogs from several leading pro-democracy advocates and easy means to find pro-democracy advocates in one’s state or locality. An internal invitation-only set of pages would facilitate communication among leaders of pro-democracy groups.

  • Promote creation of and support for a network of state and local groups working to promote participation and reform in their state – ideally seeking to integrate efforts to boost citizen participation with reform efforts and seeking to establish lasting relationships with elected officials able to enact change.

  • Coordinate regular meetings of a pro-democracy roundtable of national and local groups, designed to promote strategic thinking, greater communication and coordination in the pro-democracy movement and support for state/local efforts.

  • Develop a “war-room” communications ability able to spotlight deficits in our democracy and work being done to address those efforts.

  • Develop and work with caucuses of pro-democracy elected officials, at local, state and federal levels – coordinating strategic initiatives that can be carried out at different levels.

  • Develop curriculum about the history of expansion of democracy in the United States as a whole and individual states to be used in K-12 schools.


 
More third-party candidates run
Published November 2nd 2002 in Hampshire Gazette
The number of third party and independent candidates running for the Massachusetts Legislature has reached a 20-year high, according to a review of election records by the Associated Press. There are 34 minor party or independent candidates competing in 16 percent of House and Senate races this year. In 1980, third party or independent candidates competed in just 10 percent of races. "I was fed up with the constant betrayal of saying they were going to pass progressive legislation and then never doing it," said Sue Bartone, one of five Green Party candidates for the Massachusetts House this year. The granddaughter of a Rhode Island Democratic Party chairman, Bartone describes herself a "loyal Democrat" who became disenchanted when her party failed to challenge Ronald Reagan's policies. Now Bartone spends her time biking around Easthampton, Hadley and South Hadley drumming up support for her first candidacy for elected office. Bartone's not alone. Dissatisfaction with Republicans and Democrats has led to a subtle but significant shift in the state's political landscape. This year, there are 14 Libertarian legislative candidates, 5 Green Party candidates and a smattering of other minor party, independent and unenrolled candidates. In many cases, the candidate offers the only competition to an incumbent Republican or Democrat in the 200-seat Legislature. The rise of third party and independent candidates mirrors the growth of the fledgling Libertarian and Green parties and the decline in the ranks of registered Democratic and Republican voters. In 1980, about 46 percent of all Massachusetts voters were registered Democrats, compared to just 36 percent in 2000. Republicans have also seen their ranks dwindle from 14.2 percent to 13.6 percent. At the same time, unenrolled or third party voters have nearly doubled, from 1.1 million or 38 percent of the electorate in 1980 to more than 2 million or half of all voters in 2000. "I think we're seeing increasingly the fragmentation of the major parties in Massachusetts, especially the Democratic Party," said state Secretary William Galvin. Under state law, a party is officially recognized with the right to hold primaries if one of their statewide candidates received more than 3 percent of the vote in the previous election. The numbers of independent and third party candidates has fluctuated in the past two decades from a low of 12 candidates in 1998 to highs of 29 candidates in 1990 and 2000. The previous highwater mark came in 1978 when 38 third party and independent candidates were on the ballot in about 17 percent of House and Senate races. Gregory Doherty, a Libertarian state representative candidate from the Ashland and Framingham area, began his political life as a Republican before turning his back on the party. "I really didn't see much of a difference between them and the Democrats," he said. "They'd continually claim they wanted lower taxes and smaller government, but they'd never deliver." Doherty, a first time candidate, has relied on door-to-door contact and a local cable television show to get his message out. Without third party and independent candidates, voters would have far fewer choices on the ballot. Just 31 percent of legislative seats will feature contests between candidates from the two major parties. That puts Massachusetts 49th out of 50 states when it comes to legislative competition between Democrats and Republicans according to Common Cause of Massachusetts and Mass. Voters for Clean Elections, which sponsored the state's public campaign financing law passed in 1998. Massachusetts' claustrophobic political culture is another factor in the rise of third parties, according to Common Cause Director Pam Wilmot. "In Massachusetts it seems incumbents frequently take it as an insult if someone wants to run against them," she said. "It's very difficult for someone who wants to run against an incumbent to run in the party. It forces a lot of candidates outside of the parties." Michael Aleo knew early on he wanted to look outside the two major parties. "I remember being a student at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst and having a big discussion about whether to register as a Democrat or as an Independent in 1990," Aleo said. In the end, Aleo joined the liberal Rainbow Coalition and is running as a Green Party candidate in the Northampton, Westhampton, Southampton, Hatfield and Montgomery district. Aleo said he wants to bring attention to a system which he said stifles competition. He's sponsored a non-binding referendum question on some western Massachusetts ballots that would allow a person to vote for more than one candidate. If a voter's top choice loses, the vote goes to the second choice. Aleo said the "instant-runoff" system will allow people to vote their conscience without fear of a "spoiler" effect. "We have one party that dominates politics," he said. "That means when someone gets elected, forget about getting unseated, they don't even get challenged."