Yang argues the most impactful political action is not holding office but reforming the system itself. He advocates for structural changes like nonpartisan primaries, believing that fixing the underlying incentives is the highest-leverage way to produce better outcomes for society.
While economic policies like raising the minimum wage have broad benefits, campaign finance reform like overturning Citizens United is more fundamental. It addresses the root cause of political gridlock and corporate influence, which prevents many other positive social and economic changes from being implemented.
Politicians are fundamentally incapable of drawing fair electoral boundaries due to an inherent conflict of interest: they want to ensure their party wins. Using a randomly sampled citizens' commission, as Michigan did, removes this conflict. This allows ordinary people, guided by a sense of fairness, to create equitable maps where politicians and courts have failed.
Oklahoma City's mayor is elected in a non-partisan system where all candidates face all voters. This incentivizes building a broad coalition from the 70% of moderates, rather than appealing to the polarized extremes common in closed party primaries.
The perception of a deeply divided society is largely an artifact of a political system built on competition and elections, which forces people into two opposing camps. A system based on deliberation would reveal that most people's views are not so rigidly coherent, and it would encourage finding common ground rather than winning at all costs.
To combat a 'corrupt campaign finance system' where billionaires use Super PACs to 'buy elections,' Sanders proposes a move to public funding. This system would grant qualified candidates equal funding, leveling the playing field and making politicians accountable to voters instead of wealthy donors.
Instead of a moral failing, corruption is a predictable outcome of game theory. If a system contains an exploit, a subset of people will maximize it. The solution is not appealing to morality but designing radically transparent systems that remove the opportunity to exploit.
Expecting politicians to vote themselves out of a job is unrealistic. The path to reform is a bottom-up approach, using numerous local citizen assemblies to prove their value. When politicians realize these assemblies can solve problems and reconcile people with the system, they will adopt them to secure their own legitimacy and hold onto power.
Instead of single-winner districts, a powerful reform is creating larger, multi-member districts that elect several representatives (e.g., 4 districts electing 3 members each). This allows for more proportional outcomes that reflect an area's political diversity, as a minority group can win one of the multiple seats.
Political strategist Bradley Tusk claims the key to solving polarization is to increase primary election turnout from its typical 10%. He argues mobile voting could boost participation to 40%, forcing politicians to appeal to a more moderate majority rather than catering exclusively to the ideological extremes and special interests that currently dominate low-turnout primaries.
Public goods are either "competitive" (schools, roads), suitable for electoral debate, or "unitary" (redistricting, judicial appointments), requiring non-partisan consensus. Applying competitive electoral logic corrupts unitary goods. Representation by sampling, like a jury, is the appropriate, unbiased mechanism to govern these essential functions that underpin the rules of the game.