• Thousands more signatures than required were submitted in favor of a “top two” primary system in South Dakota.
• Under the proposed system — already implemented in states like California and Washington — candidates from all parties would appear on a single, nonpartisan ballot, and the top two would advance to the general election regardless of affiliation.
• Deanna “De” Knudson, a registered Republican sponsoring the measure, stated her belief that the current nomination system “excludes about half of the voters from the real race, and we just really believe that this is a fairness issue.”

Supporters of a “top two” primary election system in South Dakota that would replace the current partisan process with one open to all voters have submitted thousands more petition signatures than required to bring a vote this fall on their ballot initiative.

On Monday, South Dakota Open Primaries sponsors said they submitted petitions with 47,000 signatures to Secretary of State Monae Johnson’s office. The measure group needs 35,017 valid signatures to make the November ballot. Johnson’s office has until Aug. 13 to validate the measure, a proposed constitutional amendment.

Under South Dakota’s current primary election system, candidates in gubernatorial, congressional, legislative and county races compete in a partisan primary. The measure would allow all candidates to compete against each other in one primary, and the top two vote-getters in each race or for each seat would advance to the general election. A similar measure failed in 2016.

NOEM ADDRESSES FEELING ‘THREATENED’ BY NIKKI HALEY, A CONTROVERSIAL DOG KILLING, TRUMP VP SPECULATION IN BOOK

Other states such as California and Washington have “top two” primary elections similar to the measure proposed in South Dakota.

Measure sponsor Deanna “De” Knudson, a registered Republican, said she doesn’t think the state has a fair system, in that it “excludes about half of the voters from the real race, and we just really believe that this is a fairness issue.”

Republicans control South Dakota’s Legislature and hold all statewide elected offices and congressional seats. Democrats haven’t won a statewide election since 2008, when former U.S. Sen. Tim Johnson and U.S. Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin won reelection to their last terms.

South Dakota has nearly 602,000 registered voters, including 304,000 Republicans and 144,000 Democrats, but people registered as “no party affiliation” or “independent” total nearly 150,000 voters, according to online voter registration tracking.

State Republican Party Chairman and state Sen. John Wiik said he vehemently opposes the measure. He said he sees “no good coming out of it for the Republican Party.” The state GOP’s central committee unanimously opposed the measure, he said.

“I want Republicans to be able to choose the Republican candidate, and Democrats to choose the Democrat candidate,” Wiik said. “If you want to be an independent, then you’re independent of the decisions that affect your lives.”

Knudson said the measure would bring a much more competitive process and “will make sure that the winning candidate is the one most South Dakotans agree on.” She questioned the balance of power in the Legislature, where Democrats hold 11 of 105 seats, and whether that is truly reflective of voters’ will.

State Democratic Party Executive Director Dan Ahlers said the party hasn’t taken a stance on the measure. The Democratic Party allows “no party affiliation” and independent voters to vote in its primary, along with registered Democrats.

When Angelenos voted in this year’s California primary, an important group was left out: speakers of Latin American Indigenous languages such as Zapotec and K’iche’, which are not among the 19 languages in which L.A. County provides voting materials. It’s a particularly concerning oversight in Los Angeles. Our city has the largest population of Native American and Indigenous peoples of any city in the United States — and their omission has serious implications for inclusion.

Section 203 of the federal Voting Rights Act requires that counties provide election materials in the language of a linguistic minority that isn’t proficient enough in English to vote without help. That group either has to be greater than 10,000 people or represent at least 5% of a county’s total population of eligible voters. California also requires tailored ballots, at a lower threshold than federal law does: Counties here have to translate the ballot for any single language minority lacking English proficiency if it makes up at least 3% of a precinct’s voting-age residents.

To determine compliance with these laws, local and federal authorities look to census data collected every 10 years. But the government has long struggled to provide an accurate count for Latin American people.

Until this year, when the federal government changed the policy after years of debate, the census asked respondents two different questions about whether they were of Latino/Hispanic origin and what their race and ethnicity was. This approach confused some Americans who see their Latino or Hispanic identity as their ethnicity, not distinct from it. The move to combine those questions follows another change that aimed to make the count more accurate: Since 2020, the census has included free-response lines so that people could write in a specific origin, such as German or Nigerian, and counted up to six different origins per respondent, matching those to the broader racial categories such as white and Black.

Allowing those detailed responses seemed to make the data collection more comprehensive, increasing the recorded Latin American Indigenous population by 390.4% from 2010 to 2020. Even so, many scholars, us included, expect that the census still woefully undercounts the population of Central and South American Indigenous peoples.

More specifically, because it tracks language in much less detail than it does race and ethnicity, it falls short as reliable data for translations. Consider: Although census data documents 22,024 people of Latin American descent in Los Angeles County who speak a language other than English or Spanish — surpassing the Section 203 threshold of 10,000 voters — it does not identify what those languages are.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the nonprofit organization Comunidades Indígenas en Liderazgo (Indigenous Communities in Leadership), or CIELO, collected that missing data. It surveyed Latin American Indigenous communities in Los Angeles and created a map of their language diversity, which shows a concentration of voting-age Zapotec speakers in the Pico-Union and Koreatown areas.

When we overlaid the CIELO map onto a Los Angeles County precinct map, we identified approximately 36 precincts, generally between Wilshire and West Washington boulevards and from South Fairfax Avenue to South Hoover Street, with high concentrations of Zapotec speakers. Our data suggest that these speakers made up more than 12% of adults in those precincts, far exceeding the state requirement of 3%. But because this level of detail isn’t captured by official census figures, these Angelenos can’t vote in their primary language.

The impact of this gap extends well beyond voting. For example, Indigenous people from Mexico and Guatemala lacked essential COVID-19 information in their native languages during the pandemic, prompting CIELO and other groups to provide translations. Similarly, during wildfire seasons, translated information on evacuation areas, shelters and air quality has been scarce. While additional nonprofit groups such as the Mixteco/Indígena Community Organizing Project have stepped up to offer translations, the patchwork reliance on volunteers cannot guarantee access for everyone who needs these resources.

As we near the conclusion of the design phase for the 2030 census, we urge the Census Bureau to actively collaborate with Latin American Indigenous stakeholders to ensure a precise count and capture linguistic diversity within these communities. These collaborations should make sure that respondents understand the updates to the census and are equipped to provide accurate answers. They should also explore avenues to collect more detailed language information. By making sure that every voice is heard and accounted for, we build a more inclusive democracy that reflects the rich diversity of our city.

Jessica Cobian is a senior fellow and Sebastian Cazares is a graduate fellow at the UCLA Voting Rights Project. Heidy Melchor is the founder and alumni advisor of the UCLA Grupo Estudiantil Oaxaqueño.

With six months to go until Election Day 2024, the rematch between President Biden and former President Trump is as close as it can get.

The race is tied, according to a new national poll released by USA Today and Suffolk University on Monday.

Biden and Trump each stand at 37% support among registered voters, with Democrat turned independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at 8%, and 5% backing other independent or third party candidates.

HAS BIDEN FLATLINED IN THE LATEST POLLS?

“We’re basically at the doorstep of the election, and the outcome is a coin flip,” Suffolk University Political Research Center director David Paleologos said.

The survey is the second in a day to indicate an extremely close contest between the Democratic incumbent in the White House and his Republican predecessor.

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST FOX NEWS POLLING IN THE 2024 ELECTION

According to an ABC News/Ipsos poll released Sunday, Trump held a 46%-44% advantage among adults, but Biden has the edge 46%-45% among registered voters and up 49%-45% among those likely to vote in the presidential election.

Republican presidential candidate former President Trump speaks on Tuesday, April 2, 2024, at a rally in Green Bay, Wisconsin. (AP Photo/Mike Roemer)

In a five-way contest that includes Biden, Trump, Kennedy, Green Party candidate Jill Stein and independent Cornel West, Trump has the slight edge among all adults, he is tied with the president among registered voters, and Biden holds the edge among likely voters.

DO THE LATEST POLLS SPELL TROUBLE FOR BIDEN?

The Suffolk poll suggests that nearly a quarter of voters (24%) say they might change their minds ahead of the fall election, with 12% saying they have not made their choice yet in the presidential race.

President Biden speaks at the Washoe Democratic Party Office in Reno, Nevada, on Tuesday, March 19, 2024. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

“When we think about the race tied with just 26 weeks to go, we have to consider that people tune out politics and the party conventions in July and August,” Paleologos emphasized. “That leaves just 17 weeks for candidates to actively campaign, and it’s actually 13 or 14 weeks when you consider states where early voting starts weeks before Election Day.”

While national surveys garner plenty of attention, the race for the White House is a battle for the states and their electoral votes, which places a spotlight on battleground state polling.

The most recent polling in the key swing states, including surveys from Fox News, indicate close contests.

Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.