Originally published in the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel
The most revealing metric from the June 30 primary election wasn’t the final vote tally for any single candidate or the margin of victory in any specific race. The most revealing metric was the empty space in the ballot boxes, the massive, echoing silence of the millions of Colorado voters who will have no say in who wins the general election in November.
Why? Because — with only a few races as exceptions — the winners in November were effectively determined June 30. And this has real impacts because the voters on that Tuesday have different views on things like affordable housing; roads and infrastructure; and health-care costs than voters in the fall general election. And who do politicians listen to? The people who elected them in a low-turnout primary.
When the dust settled and the results were tabulated, we saw the culmination of weeks of campaign noise, mailers, and debates. But when we look at the cold, hard data, the primary takeaway isn’t about which candidates celebrated victories. It is about the fundamental health of our representative democracy where, even after opening primaries to independent voters, turnout was less than four in 10 active voters.
We rightfully take pride in Colorado’s election administration. Our mail-in voting system and automatic voter registration are the gold standard for voter access and for vote-counting integrity. Yet, that same voting system has landed us in what has been described as “The Colorado Democracy Paradox.” We make it exceptionally easy to cast and count votes in the general election, but we have built an election system that makes it increasingly difficult to cast a meaningful one.
Regardless of who you wanted to win on June 30, the real losers were Colorado voters.
The tragedy of our system is that, on the day after the primary the outcome for roughly 90% of races has been determined. According to the Cook Political Report, seven of Colorado’s eight U.S. House seats are considered “safe” for one party or the other. In our lone competitive district, there will be lots of noise around the general election. That can leave the impression that there is competition everywhere when, in the vast majority of districts, real decisions were made in the party caucuses and primaries — contests that are decided by a tiny fraction of the electorate.
The numbers are alarming. In Colorado’s 1st Congressional District, for example, Unite America Institute research shows that only about 25% of eligible voters participated in the Democratic primary that effectively determined the seat that has not been won by a Republican since 1970. When you look deeper, only about 13% of voters cast a ballot for the winning candidate. That’s about the same percentage credited for electing Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert (CD-4) in 2024.
Across the state, we see a pattern where 88% of our House seats are determined in the dominant party primary, with just 5% of all Colorado voters — who tend to be the most ideological and partisan — participating in those specific, decisive elections. When such a narrow, unrepresentative slice of the electorate dictates our representatives, we lose the diversity of thought and the pragmatism that voters deserve. We also lose accountability to the majority.
This isn’t about criticizing any particular political ideology or policy preference. It’s about recognizing a structural malfunction. Whether you identify as a progressive, a conservative, or something else, the current system is designed in a way that minimizes the influence of the broader electorate. Independent voters — now the state’s largest voting bloc — are unable to influence the outcome of caucus and assemblies or sign candidate petitions, effectively locking them out of the most important parts of the process.
We are seeing the same dynamic play out nationally, where roughly 90% of U.S. House races are decided in primaries. But Colorado has a history of being a pioneer. We have led the nation in election innovation before, and we have the capacity to do it again.
It doesn’t have to stay like this.
When voters are the ones paying for elections, they should be able to vote for the candidate they want, regardless of party!
That’s why I have long expressed my personal preference for open primaries and other reforms designed to improve our elections, but I am just one voice. Our democracy needs more voices, more ideas, and more seats at the table. We need a system that invites participation rather than restricting it to the most organized factions.
That’s why I am encouraged by the work of groups like Courageous Colorado, which is confronting the Democracy Paradox by engaging local leaders and residents to redefine what representation looks like in our state. Rather than dictating a single prescriptive solution, they are gathering the experiences and solutions of Coloradans themselves to build a path forward.
If you are frustrated by the lack of choice, if you feel your vote in November matters less than it should, or if you simply believe that Colorado can do better, get involved. Visit the Courageous Colorado website, attend a listening session, and bring your ideas to the table.
We can trade this antiquated, exclusionary process for a 21st-century democracy that truly reflects the will of the majority. Let’s stop letting the system decide for us. It’s time we decide for ourselves.
