Why not just run as independents?

Running as an independent sounds appealing to many people. They are frustrated with the major parties and want candidates who are not tied to either one. So why not skip the work of building a new party and just run as independents?

There are both practical and strategic reasons why we believe a party is the better path.

The practical reason is ballot access.

Every independent candidate must gather petition signatures from registered voters in their district each time they run. This is not a one-time requirement. It repeats every election and every candidate.

Statewide and congressional independents need 5,000 signatures each time. Candidates who run in districts must collect signatures from four percent of registered voters in that district. On average, this comes to about 2,000 signatures for a state senate district and about 700 for a state house district.

If a group wants to run 10 independent candidates for the Kansas House, they will need roughly 7,000 signatures. Add seven Senate candidates and that adds another 14,000 signatures. That is more than 21,000 signatures every election cycle.

By gathering 20,000 signatures one time to form a new party, all these candidates can be nominated for the general election without individual petition drives. One collective effort replaces dozens of separate ones.

The strategic reasons matter just as much.

Independent candidates almost always run for high-profile statewide offices like governor or United States Senator. They rarely run for the legislature or local offices, which means independent campaigns do not build any long-term political bench. They leave no continuity, training, or shared experience for future candidates.

There is another strategic advantage to forming a party: ballot identity. Even if a group of independent candidates forms a unified moderate coalition, voters will never see that coalition’s name on the ballot. Each candidate simply appears as “independent.”

One of the main purposes of a party is to give low-interest voters a shorthand they can rely on. Most voters do not have the time or desire to research several down-ballot races. They want some indication of which candidates broadly share their values. An independent label does not provide that. A party identity does.

Voters want to know more than the word “independent.” They want to know whether a candidate is “independently” conservative, centrist, or liberal. Independent campaigns are usually personality-driven. They rise and fall with the individual and leave no lasting structure, no philosophical coalition, and no institutional support for future candidates.

• A new party can do what independents cannot:

• recruit and train candidates across a range of districts

• build a consistent identity that voters can understand

• create a long-term home for moderates

• compete in the many uncontested seats where independents almost never run

• make durable, scalable change instead of one-off campaigns

Running as independents may sound simpler, but it makes sustained reform almost impossible. Building a party gives moderates a real home, a shared voice, and a practical path to change the direction of Kansas politics.