The Bipartisan Path Forward argues that split-ticket voting can reduce political polarization, encourage bipartisan cooperation, and hold elected officials accountable for effective governance rather than party loyalty. What inspired you to write this book? 

I started writing The Bipartisan Path Forward because I felt that what we were doing as a country simply wasn’t working. Despite our differences, Americans increasingly share a frustration with a federal government that seems unable to solve our biggest problems. After years of analyzing federal election results and corresponding voting data, I wanted to find a practical solution that everyday Americans could actually implement. As I outline in my book, the solution is quite simple and attainable for all Americans: it starts with how we vote.

What was the most surprising finding in your research about the relationship between voting patterns and lawmakers’ behavior?

What surprised me most was how much our voting habits shape politicians’ incentives. As voters have increasingly prioritized party affiliation over individual candidates, politicians have had more reason to protect their party than to deliver results. When reelection depends on party loyalty, cooperation becomes a liability rather than an asset. Even more encouraging, it takes only a relatively small shift in voting patterns to change the balance of power in Washington (only a 1% change in voting patterns in fact), meaning individual voters have more influence than they might realize. My book outlines how we leverage that power to our advantage. 

Can you share an example of a meaningful conversation that changed someone’s political perspective, and what made that conversation successful?

I actually spend a considerable portion of my book on this very point. An example I quite enjoyed detailing was regarding Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, two uniquely intelligent, passionate, consequential Americans, whose beliefs were so disparate that it led to the formation of the first two political parties in the US. Further, they were known political enemies. To provide a brief excerpt: 

“Rather than allow their justified self-reliance and open antagonism blind them to the views of others, they embraced the concept that their political opponents may have a point. Rather than bicker, they listened to one another to learn and refine their judgments. In doing so, they gained new information, and their opinions changed. By pushing away their respective prides and embracing the sound arguments offered, they governed more effectively, and the country and the world are indebted to them for it. Jefferson and Hamilton show that even for the very men who wrote the founding documents, they alone did not possess the definitive answers for how our nation shall move forward.”

If they both understood the importance of meaningful conversation, then we as fellow Americans can as well.

What do you hope readers will do differently the next time they enter a voting booth? 

I hope readers will look beyond the letter next to a candidate’s name and consider that person’s character, qualifications, and commitment to public service. You don’t have to abandon your political beliefs to make a difference. By being willing to split your ticket and vote for the best candidate for each position, you can change the incentives politicians face and help build a government that works for everyone.

Author Links: Goodreads | Facebook | Website