One bad reform, and one good reform
Increasing transparency is good, but silencing the voters is bad.
The Indiana state legislature passed two reforms regarding elections in the most recent legislative session. One of the reforms is antidemocratic and should be reversed, but the other one will increase transparency and standardize elections for Hoosier voters. First, the bad reform:
For over one hundred years, Indiana University alumni have elected some of the university's board of trustees. The governor appoints 6 of the 9 trustees, with the other three spots elected by university alumni. In a deeply Republican state this assures that a super-majority will be appointed by a Republican governor, but alumni still have a voice. The Indiana state legislature erased that choice and silenced the voices of several hundred thousand Indiana University graduates. In addition to being undemocratic, it is an unnecessary move given the supermajority of gubernatorial appointments.
Worse yet, this is targeted legislation that does not impact Purdue University, Ball State University or Indiana State University. This is likely unconstitutional, as state government is not permitted to treat some institutions differently than others under state law. Had all state universities been affected, this would be more defensible. This looks more like a power grab than a legitimate reform.
The good reform is requiring candidates for school boards to state partisan affiliation. While there are outliers, party affiliation is an easy way for voters to identify the candidates' ideological leanings. This increases transparency for voters.
With most local offices, I can easily discern who the candidates are and especially what they stand for. That is never the case with the school board, so I have to ask a trusted friend who knows a lot about the local school system. If it is difficult for me, who pays closer attention to local government than many others, I imagine it is more difficult for others. Declaring partisan affiliation would help that a great deal. It would also encourage competition by encouraging the parties to recruit candidates for school board. Last year, all of the school board races were uncontested, which is never good for voters or for children in the school system.
Hopefully in the future, the Indiana General Assembly will focus more on empowering voters with reforms like the second example, instead of consolidating power in the governor's office like the first example.