​HEY, NON-PARTISANS: FEELING LEFT OUT?

Non-partisan voters comprise 37% of Nevada active voters as of January, 2026. That grows to 41% If you take into account Independent voters mistakenly categorized as members of the Independent American Party. Non-partisans are the fastest growing voter bloc in the state. Non-partisan registration grew by 85,710 voters in 2025, while the Democratic Party lost 33,509 voters and the Republican Party lost 26,207. In District 39, Non-partisans comprise 28% of voters which, again, goes up to 32% if you take into account mis-categorized Independent voters.

Nevertheless, Non-partisans are not allowed to fully participate in our primary elections because they do not belong to a political party. Under our closed primary system, they can pick and choose in the general election from a list of candidates pre-selected by their fellow citizens who do belong to a party. But they have no part in determining who is on the list in the first place. 

I have a simple proposal to address the disenfranchising of more than one-third of Nevada voters. Come primary election time, an in-person Non-partisan voter simply asks for and submits a Republican, Democratic, or third-party primary ballot. They can also stick with only voting for non-partisan issues and offices. If they prefer voting by mail, Non-partisan voters will also be sent a packet including primary ballots for all the parties. They then choose which primary, if any, they want to vote in and complete and mail in the appropriate ballot. 

A similar proposal was introduced by Speaker Yeager in the 2025 Legislative Session. This bill, AB597, would have required Non-partisans wishing to participate in a party primary to request their desired party ballot from their County Clerk two weeks before the election. They could also make that choice in person during early voting. I definitely would have supported AB597, and in fact testified in favor of it before the Joint Meeting of Assembly and Senate Legislative Operations and Elections Committee. However, I don’t see the point in making Non-partisans jump through extra hoops and would not require the extra steps outlined in AB597. 

AB597 passed the Assembly along party lines, with Democrats in favor and Republicans opposed. It passed the Senate in similar fashion, but with one Democratic senator opposed. It was then vetoed by the Governor. 





​

In his veto statement, the Governor repeated a misleading argument made by Republicans during debate on the bill. He said he vetoed the bill because Nevada voters had rejected open primaries, falsely implying a connection with AB597. Nevadans did reject open primaries in voting down Ballot Measure 3 in 2024, and I for one voted against it. But contrary to the Governor’s insinuation, neither AB597 or my proposal has anything to do with open primaries—in which, for example, Republicans could vote in Democratic primaries, and vice versa. I am against open primaries—I’m for full Non-partisan participation in the electoral process. 

The principal Republican argument outside the Governor’s statement was their contention that primaries were a private activity, carried on by a private organization, and they were well within their rights to limit participation to members of their private group. That’s well and good, but then how about this private group pay for this private event with their own private money?

Closed primaries are taxation without representation on steroids. Non-partisan taxpayers are paying not only for an election from which they are excluded but also the registration and election infrastructure which marks them for exclusion.     
​
Including Non-partisans in primary elections is a matter of basic fairness. As a candidate, I regard Non-partisans as a thoughtful, open-minded group of voters whose support I would be happy to earn. I realize that Nevada’s registration system can result in voters being classified as Non-partisan by default, rather than through a deliberate choice. But I also know people are dissatisfied with the political parties, or don’t see party membership as the only path toward political participation and influence, or they just aren’t joiners. Whatever the case, I look forward to a change in the law which calls for candidates to present themselves and their ideas to this important and growing group of voters.

​