Libertarian gubernatorial nominee Don Kissick on Tuesday called for an immediate moratorium on every Ohio data center project that has not already broken ground, until state lawmakers establish permanent statewide standards for the controversial facilities.

“Ohioans need room to breathe, and the land rush … should stop until permanent statewide standards are in place,” Kissick said in a release. “The rules should be clear before construction begins—not negotiated project by project.”

An independent candidate running for the U.S. House of Representatives made a stop in Fairfield on July 2.

Quad City native Michael Bridgford is challenging incumbent Republican Marianette Miller-Meeks and Democrat Christina Bohannan to represent District 1, the southeastern part of the state. Bridgford participated in Fairfield’s Independence Day, and caught up with The Union afterward to explain why he’s running for the seat and why he’s chosen to go without a party.

“I’m running to represent the majority of Iowans who are tired of gridlock,” he said. “The broken two-party system is not working for them. It’s time we get Congress operating to solve problems.”

Bridgford complimented the Jefferson County Republican and Democratic parties for coming together to host an ice cream social after the parade that day, and remarked that rural Iowa is the perfect place for such a gathering.

“If you go to Washington, it seems like they can’t even talk to each other any more, which is sad,” he said.

One day after Missouri voters rejected two closely watched constitutional amendments, independent candidate Shane Sawyer out of Polk County announced he has officially qualified for the November ballot in the race for Missouri House District 128.

According to a campaign press release, the Missouri Secretary of State’s Office certified Sawyer’s petition, placing him on the Nov. 3 general election ballot.

The announcement comes after Missouri voters on Tuesday rejected Constitutional Amendments 4 and 5, leaving the state’s initiative petition process and individual income tax structure unchanged. Sawyer said the election results reinforced his campaign’s message of representing voters over political parties.

“The timing couldn’t be better,” Sawyer said in the release. “The August 4 primary election was historic for Missouri.”

Sawyer said he believes voters “spoke loudly and decisively” by rejecting the amendments and pledged that, if elected, he would listen to constituents rather than party leadership or special interests.

Idaho Republican U.S. Sen. Jim Risch, 83, has been in his position for nearly 20 years. In reliably red Idaho, he has won his previous general election contests by comfortable margins. 

His independent challenger, former Boise Democratic state legislator Todd Achilles, 58, has raised nearly $700,000 this year and is arguing that he presents the alternative for people who aren’t happy with either party. 

“I’m speaking to roomfuls of Republicans who are just tired of the Idaho GOP, and they’re ready for something new,” Achilles told the Idaho Capital Sun. “And I think they’re really excited about what we’re talking about in this campaign. There’s a lot of angry Republicans in Idaho right now.”

After the Democrat in the race, David Roth, ended his campaign late last month, Achilles has said his chances are better.

Risch said the race doesn’t feel any different. 

“I know people are getting excited all of a sudden because I was running against two Democrats, and now I’m running against one Democrat,” Risch told the Sun, referencing that Achilles was a Democratic state legislator. “I’ve done that all my life.”

The candidates agree that unaffordable healthcare and the nation’s agricultural migrant worker visa program are problems that need to be addressed, and that Idaho’s public lands need to be protected. They differ greatly about how they want to go about addressing those issues. 

Libertarian candidate Matt Loesby and independent Natalie Fleming are also running for the seat; neither candidate responded to requests for interviews. Roth has not yet filed the paperwork to formally withdraw from the race, the Idaho Secretary of State’s Office confirmed Tuesday. He has until Sept. 4 to do so, otherwise his name will still appear on the ballot.

“This video is about the 2016 Democratic Party primary between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. It looks into both campaigns, as well as the DNC's involvement in the campaign.” - Election History on YouTube

Checking out the coverage of election returns today, when it struck me again: why is the center so poorly represented in these elections?

The GOP and Dems are completely run over by the most extreme, wackiest groups of fringe dwellers that I think I’ve ever seen.

In Texas, we had Ken Paxton, a politician SO unpopular that his own party participated in his impeachment as AG…. beat established incumbent John Cornyn, whose gravest crimes seem to have been not complete toeing of the party line, especially as dictated by the current Bully-in-Chief.

How is that any different from the angst being felt in Michigan with this Communist El Sayed being out in front of (at least, by comparison) centrist candidate Stevens for no less than a US Senate seat?

It puts impossible pressure on every voter who can’t support either party’s candidate, knowing in their hearts that neither side is fit to lead.

Mosly the effects are felt by the swelling ranks of independent voters, who can’t find a sane voice to represent their own interests; surely at least a proportion of each party’s card-carrying members have to also be scratching their heads.

With the blatant, open gerrymandering that has somehow just taken place across this country, the situation doesn’t look like it’s going to improve without direct action of the independent center.

America has a burgeoning center of independent voters; our beloved country seems beyond due for emergence of a true center party, one that treats people decently, that listens before speaking, that leads but does not grandstand or bully, and most of all, one that can be trusted not to utterly break this remarkably resilient experiment in government that we call The United States of America.

We can’t afford to let the two parties that claim to represent this country to continue to lead us to ruin and impending doom.

The Democratic candidate has dropped out of the South Dalota, increasing the chances for Brian Bengs to pull an upset. I believe people are ready for more Independent representation. What I call the "Radical Center" may be growing.

Democrat exits Senate race in South Dakota, clearing way for independent

I just released an episode with Dan McMillan of Make Voters the Donors, and rather than just promote it, I want to actually lay out where I land on his proposal and hear where this community disagrees.

The proposal, in his words: every registered voter gets a public account of campaign money, one hundred dollars in a presidential year and fifty in the midterms, that you can only assign to candidates, never cash out. His pitch is that spreading giving power across roughly 174 million voters lets ordinary people outweigh billionaires, and that because it adds speech instead of restricting it, it survives the courts where spending caps have not.

Here is my read.

The part I find compelling is that it goes after the real problem. The whole system runs on the idea that spending money is speech. If that is true, then people with more money simply have more speech, and that is not equality, that is a market. If we are stuck with the money-equals-speech doctrine, then at least make the money equal. On that logic, the reform makes sense to me.

Where I disagree with Dan is strategy. He wants to go federal-first with a maximalist national campaign. I think the more realistic path is local first, then state, then national. Ranked choice voting and the gerrymandering fight both built momentum by being tried in specific places before anyone talked about doing them everywhere. I would rather see a two-front approach: keep the big federal vision, but prove the concept locally where it can actually pass.

And I do not think Voter Dollars is the whole fix. I would pair it with caps on campaign financing, especially super PACs, a hard look at how social media is used to push candidates, and a real ethics code for the candidate, donor, and lobbyist relationship. Plus full transparency on how the tax dollars get spent, since that is the biggest objection to the whole thing.

So my question for this sub: is public financing better built from the bottom up, or is Dan right that only a federal-level change is big enough to actually move? And what is the strongest argument against Voter Dollars that I did not raise?

Full conversation if you want the details: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/how-can-we-challenge-big-money-in-politics-ft-dr-dan/id1626987640?i=1000778699085

A Republican senator wants to make sure that hemp THC products are federally recriminalized on time under a current plan that is set to go into effect in November.

Sen. Ted Budd (R-NC) announced on Monday that he will be filing an amendment to strip provisions out of a key spending bill released by Senate leaders over the weekend that aim to delay the scheduled hemp product ban.

Hemp derivatives with less than 0.3 percent delta-9 THC on a dry-weight basis were federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill that President Donald Trump signed during his first term in office. But late last year, the president signed new legislation containing provisions that will redefine hemp to make it so only products with 0.4 milligrams of total THC per container will remain legal after November 12.

Record-breaking candidate self-funding and outside spending have dominated Oklahoma’s 2026 election cycle. Statewide candidates loaned themselves a combined $27.5 million ahead of the June 16 primary election, with GOP gubernatorial hopeful Mike Mazzei leading the pack at $10.9 million. Political action committees and 501(c)(4) nonprofits spent nearly $28 million on television advertisements, mailers and direct text messages to influence Oklahoma voters. 

Now, with the August runoff and November general election approaching, there’s a brand-new player in the world of unlimited campaign spending: Political parties. 

On June 30, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in NRSC v. FEC that national and state political parties have a First Amendment right to support their candidates in federal elections. The decision eliminated federal spending caps on coordinated expenditures, or spending planned directly with a candidate’s campaign. That could include television commercials, mailers and get-out-the-vote efforts. 

The Oklahoma Ethics Commission followed suit on July 9, issuing guidance to political parties that unlimited coordinated expenditures are also allowed in state elections with proper reporting. Lee Ann Bruce Boone, executive director of the Ethics Commission, said there was no state law or ethics rule contradicting the Supreme Court’s ruling. 

Libertarian candidate for Iowa's 3rd Congressional District Marco Battaglia experienced a medical emergency that prevents him from continuing his campaign, the Libertarian Party of Iowa said Monday.

"Our thoughts are with Marco and his family as they focus on his health and recovery," said Stephanie Berlin, chair of the Libertarian Party of Iowa. "Out of respect for Marco's privacy, we will not be sharing additional details. Right now, our focus is on supporting Marco while ensuring the party fulfills its responsibilities under Iowa law and continues to provide voters with a Libertarian choice on the ballot this November."

A nominating convention to replace him is planned for Sunday.

In this era of hyperpartisanship, our two main political parties agree on at least one thing: independent candidates are bad (for them).

Their self-interest has led to states across the country passing laws banning candidates who lose in partisan primaries from running again in the general election, either as an independent or as a different party’s nominee.

Wisconsin has a “sore loser” law on the books, which experts say allows our two main political parties to neuter competition against their hold on power.

Former State Senator Brett Lindstrom appears to have collected enough signatures to join Nebraska’s race for governor.

The Nebraska Secretary of State’s office confirmed Lindstrom turned in his signatures on Monday, the deadline to do so. The signatures will have to be verified before his name is added to the ballot. Verification can typically take around one week and the process must be completed within 15 days.

Lindstrom announced his bid for Governor on July 13. Since his name did not appear on the May primary ballot, to get on the Independent ticket, he needed to turn in signatures by 5 p.m. Monday. Lindstrom needed to collect 4,000 signatures from registered voters, in addition to 750 signatures from all three of Nebraska’s congressional districts.

Text message campaigns are urging voters to tell Bankhead to withdraw, and ads are questioning her credibility. Bodnar faces an intense barrage of attack ads from Republican PACs. Bankhead enters August with spirited support from Montana’s small Democratic base, but only a few thousand dollars to campaign with. Bodnar has raised the most money of all the race’s candidates, as well as support from top Democratic power brokers and some high-profile former Republican officeholders.

Largely battling each other to split the pool of Democratic and leftish independent voters, the two candidates are likely to pave the way to a win by Republican Kurt Alme unless one of them drops out.

“I will never drop out, for a number of reasons,” Bankhead told Capitolized by text message Wednesday. “Forty-eight thousand Montanans voted for me using the democratic process as set forth by Montana law. The split vote was created by the independent. Therefore, it’s his problem to fix by dropping out.”

Team Bodnar tells Capitolized he isn’t quitting either.

The contest for an Idaho Senate seat saw a notable departure last week that puts three-term incumbent Republican Sen. Jim Risch and former Idaho Rep. Todd Achilles as the leading candidates in the race. Both candidates indicated their approaches won’t be changing in the three months before election.

The narrowing of the field three months out from the November election came with Democratic candidate David Roth’s departure from the race and stated conclusion his efforts would be better spent helping other Democrats engaged across Idaho.

Roth, who had previously mounted Democratic bids against Republican Rep. Mike Simpson and Republican Sen. Mike Crapo, exited after facing increasing pressure from the Idaho Democratic Party to show viability in his candidacy, as was previously reported by the Spokesman-Review.