.png)
At a time when Americans are looking for leaders to tackle issues that directly affect their daily lives — from the economy to education to infrastructure — lawmakers in two states have called special sessions not to improve people’s quality of life, but to change election rules that make it harder for voters to participate.
In Louisiana, lawmakers have called a special session to delay next year’s primary elections, hoping to give the Supreme Court time to rule on a pending redistricting case. The session became necessary after the Legislature ended the state’s long-standing open primary system for certain offices last year — a change that’s already caused confusion for voters. In Indiana, Gov. Mike Braun — facing pressure from President Donald Trump and his allies — called a special session on redistricting on Monday.
Recent polls show that both of these moves are deeply unpopular with voters in Louisiana and Indiana, especially as both states face more pressing issues at home. It’s a striking contrast: While voters say they want a government that works, politicians in both states are prioritizing unnecessary, costly, and unpopular election changes that serve partisan interests, not the majority of voters.
According to a new poll from JMC Analytics, nearly 70% of Louisiana voters support the state’s open, all-candidate primary system. Implemented in the 1970s, it gave every voter the freedom to cast a ballot for any candidate — regardless of party — in every taxpayer-funded election. It also ensured that candidates had to win a majority of the vote to take office, encouraging campaigning beyond just the bases of both parties.
Research from the Unite America Institute finds that Louisiana’s all-candidate primary system is producing more competition, more meaningful votes, less polarization, and better outcomes on key issues like healthcare and education.
But last year, as soon as he took office, Gov. Jeff Landry pressured the legislature to close the state’s primaries for some races — throwing a wrench into that five-decade Louisiana tradition. No longer will voters be able to cast a ballot for any candidate for any office; rather, they’ll either be limited to one major party’s ballot, or in the case of third-party voters, be locked out entirely.
The same JMC poll shows that more than 40% of voters aren’t aware the system was changed, risking widespread confusion in next year’s midterm elections. Changing the dates (again) during this special session will further compound this confusion and disenfranchise voters. That likely explains, at least in part, why more than 70% of votes in the poll support delaying implementation of closed primaries, or repealing the effort outright.
Republican Lt. Gov. Billy Nungesser urged lawmakers to leave the open system in place, writing: “The open system made us better candidates, better leaders, and ultimately made Louisiana stronger … Why would we risk that when the system we already have works so well?”
Similarly, in Indiana, a recent poll commissioned by Unite America found that voters overwhelmingly reject partisan efforts to change election rules. Specifically, they opposed a special session to redraw their congressional map. After hearing balanced arguments from both sides of the debate, 69% opposed the proposal — with only 21% in support.
Indiana’s map already has a Republican lean, with seven of the nine seats safe for the GOP. However, following consistent pressure from the White House, Gov. Braun has called lawmakers back for a special session to pass a map that would favor Republicans in all nine races — part of the broader redistricting battle playing out nationwide.
The message from Indiana voters is clear: prioritize issues that affect their daily lives, not partisan power grabs. When given a list of 14 issues, redrawing Congressional maps ranks dead last.
And similar to Louisiana, the poll found that most Indiana voters oppose a proposal to close the state’s primaries to registered party members only — also under consideration by Republican lawmakers. If enacted, roughly 2 million independents would lose the right to vote in the elections that matter most, since all nine congressional districts are effectively decided in the primaries. After hearing arguments from both sides, 77% opposed closed primaries, including 66% of Republican primary voters.
These efforts aren’t confined to Louisiana and Indiana. In Texas, the state Republican Party sued the secretary of state last month to enforce closed primaries. If successful, an estimated 2.7 million independent voters would lose the freedom to choose which party primary to participate in. Texas is also one of 20 states that doesn’t currently register voters by party, so a move to closed primaries would not only be confusing for voters, it would be extremely burdensome for election administrators and costly for all taxpayers.
Elsewhere, lawmakers in Ohio, South Carolina, and Missouri are floating proposals to limit who can vote in publicly-funded elections.
It’s part of a growing national trend: Instead of making the government more responsive to voters, politicians are doubling down on policies that serve their own interests instead of the public good.
We don’t have to imagine the impact of closed primaries. We’re seeing it in Washington — a Congress paralyzed by politicians more afraid of losing a primary than shutting down the government. As we’ve written before, the incentives baked into closed primaries reward gridlock over governance.
If these states succeed in closing their primaries, they’ll only deepen that dysfunction — creating more division at a time when voters are desperate for unity and results.
Voters in Louisiana, Indiana, and across the country aren’t clamoring for more gerrymandering, more closed primaries, and other partisan moves to limit participation. They’re asking for leaders who deliver real solutions and who are accountable to the majority.
Closed primaries are a distraction from the real work of governing — and voters know it.
Stay up-to-date on the latest news and resources from Unite America.
.png)
