Pursuant of the value-based platform, the purpose of this report is to define statements constituting guardrails on the issue of election reform through membership polling by the North Carolina Forward Party (NCFP). The NCFP Executive Committee formed the NCFP Interim Policy Committee (IPC) to collect, analyze, and interpret polling information from members to establish guardrails relating to election reform.
This report and its content tie into the following value-based platform of the Forward Party:
- Support and Strengthen Democracy to Elevate the Voters’ Voice
- Use Data to Drive Collaborative and Effective Solutions, Regardless of their Ideological Source
- Build from the Bottom Up, Not the Top Down
Election reform generally aims to improve fairness, accountability, and public trust in the electoral process. Efforts have focused on enhancing and securing the voting process to ensure equal access and representation, increasing transparency in political financing to diminish undue influence, and tackling redistricting to prevent manipulation of electoral boundaries for political benefit.
Election reform covers a broad spectrum of topics, each contributing to improving elections. The diversity of member perspectives necessitates a polling strategy that captures a wide range of preferences, enabling a holistic understanding of these preferences and where consensus could be established.
Click HERE to read the full report.
Addendum: The following amendment has been made to the original report.
PoliCo has revised our guardrail framework to shift from a context-based approach to a rule-based approach, in response to membership and candidate feedback for greater clarity. This change has been applied to the guardrails for election reform.
Context-Based vs. Rule-Based
Context-Based: Decisions were guided by broader principles and situational considerations.
Rule-Based: Decisions are guided by specific, predefined rules that clearly define boundaries.
Clarification
Under the new rule-based framework, guardrails are designed to provide clear, actionable boundaries tied directly to policy positions. This means that abstract concepts like "rights" or "privileges" are not appropriate foundations for establishing guardrails. Instead, guardrails focus on setting limiting principles that ensure policy proposals align with our stated objectives and values.
For example, rather than addressing whether voting is a "right" or a "privilege," a rule-based guardrail would specify actionable constraints, such as preventing undue burdens on citizens seeking to vote. This approach ensures clarity, consistency, and alignment with our mission.
Accordingly, these guardrails were removed from consideration.
Results
Survey Question: Do you support the change from a context-based framework to a rule-based framework for our guardrails?
N = 26
Response Breakdown:
Strongly Support: 26.9%
Somewhat Support: 30.8%
Neutral: 30.8%
Somewhat Oppose: 7.7%
Strongly Oppose: 3.8%
Survey Question: Do you support the following rule-based framework for our left guardrails around election reform?
(Access) No policy can undermine election security measures.
N = 26
Response Breakdown:
Strongly Support: 57.7%
Somewhat Support: 26.9%
Neutral: 0%
Somewhat Oppose: 11.5%
Strongly Oppose: 3.8%
Survey Question: Do you support the following rule-based framework for our left guardrails around election reform?
(Education) Election education is limited to essential, non-partisan information that supports participation and stays within budget.
N = 26
Response Breakdown:
Strongly Support: 57.7%
Somewhat Support: 26.9%
Neutral: 7.7%
Somewhat Oppose: 7.7%
Strongly Oppose: 0%
Survey Question: Do you support the following rule-based framework for our left guardrails around election reform?
(Fairness) Voting policies must be justified by concrete legal foundations or rigorous, replicable studies.
N = 26
Response Breakdown:
Strongly Support: 65.4%
Somewhat Support: 23.1%
Neutral: 7.7%
Somewhat Oppose: 3.8%
Strongly Oppose: 0%
Survey Question: Do you support the following rule-based framework for our right guardrails around election reform?
(Security) No policy can result in an undue invasion of voter privacy.
N = 26
Response Breakdown:
Strongly Support: 73.1%
Somewhat Support: 23.1%
Neutral: 0%
Somewhat Oppose: 3.8%
Strongly Oppose: 0%
Survey Question: Do you support the following rule-based framework for our right guardrails around election reform?
(Stewardship) Election programs must be cost-effective and must not compromise voter education or participation.
N = 26
Response Breakdown:
Strongly Support: 61.5%
Somewhat Support: 30.8%
Neutral: 7.7%
Somewhat Oppose: 0%
Strongly Oppose: 0%
Survey Question: Do you support the following rule-based framework for our right guardrails around election reform?
(Eligibility) No policy should create significant barriers or undue burdens for citizens to vote.
N = 26
Response Breakdown:
Strongly Support: 80.8%
Somewhat Support: 15.4%
Neutral: 3.8%
Somewhat Oppose: 0%
Strongly Oppose: 0%