Watching the Republican and Democratic Presidential debates this year felt like sloppily scripted reality television.

It’s like MTV’s the Real World: what did Trump say now, Hillary’s smug smile while Bernie shouts for reform, and little corporate emblems in the background like product placement. Many Americans are tired of this nonsense. There is a growing trend of people identifying as independents (43 percent, according to a 2015 Gallup Poll).

An unprecedented portion of the electorate now identify as neither Republican or Democrat. So how will this influence the current election?

I spoke with Daniel Howle from the Independent Voters Project to try and understand this trend, how it will influence the current election, and the future of American politics. The IVP has two main concerns: they want every voter to have the opportunity to vote in every stage of the election process, and they believe any individual should be able to run for office.

Laws regarding how independents vote in a presidential primary are distinct for each state. Most states require independents to register with a party within a few months of a closed primary. This has hurt the Sanders campaign in many states. Therefore voters are taking legal action to prevent it from playing a role in California.

Bernie Sanders holds the record as the longest serving independent member of Congress in American history. His choice to join the Democratic party and run as a Democrat is a political reality. Howle said: “political parties are private organizations”, and that Bernie had “no chance to get on the ballot” unless he joined Democrats. The procedures for getting onto the ballot for a presidential election varies state to state, making it challenging and convoluted, but is generally supervised by the Federal Election Commission and much easier with major party affiliation.

The IVP has also taken legal action in California. Howle said: “IVP authored a resolution that would have had the legislature request the Secretary of State to provide an ‘independent ballot’ which would give EVERY no party preference voter in California a ballot that would include every qualified presidential candidate to be on the ballot.” This elegant solution still allows the respective parties to designate delegates based on these votes, yet the California Legislature dismissed their case.

Howle said the IVP is additionally pursuing legal action in New Jersey. More than 47 percent of the electorate in NJ is politically unaffiliated. He elaborated: “The suit was based on two causes of action. First, elections are paid for with public funds. As private organizations, the political parties are receiving a gift of public funds. New Jersey law states that private organizations cannot receive public funds unless there is an overwhelming public benefit.”

The IVP claims “that a voter’s right has a higher level of importance than the rights of political parties. The two political parties claim the right of association as a reason to conduct closed primary elections. We believe that a person’s political preference or lack thereof should not prevent any voter the opportunity in choosing who represents them.” Howle, speaking for the IVP, stated that “Closed primaries are a form of voter discrimination” which would have potentially devastating consequences for the June 7th primary results.

Howle described the IVP’s next move. A “national movement to open all primaries” for the next presidential primaries. They propose a universal ballot, every voter would get a ballot with every presidential candidate and elections officials would report the results based on the registration preferences of all voters. The proposition seems reasonable, because “political parties would have the option of counting only the votes cast by members of their party in allocating delegates to their nominating conventions.” A universal ballot would simplify the voting process for independents and wouldn’t tamper with the delegate system.

Aside from Citizens United, Bernie’s commitment to campaign finance reform and publicly funded elections appears additionally important now that the electorate has shifted so significantly. The differential in pledged delegates between the Sanders and Clinton campaign makes large battleground states like California and NJ crucial for the nomination. Despite what most news outlets are saying, the June 7th primaries are highly unlikely to change the mathematical reality of a close contest heading into the DNC. At the DNC, Bernie will be able to make an extremely compelling case, not only because he statistically beats Trump by a larger margin than Hillary, but because a General Election will include more independent votes (not included in the calculations based on primary results).

Howle explained that in California, demographics are shifting as “Hispanics and Asian populations are growing rapidly while Caucasian and Black populations are not growing. Both Asian and Hispanic voters choose not to indicate a party preference at higher percentages than Blacks or Caucasians.”

In addition he said: “The trend among voters under the age of 30 is to choose not to indicate a political party preference regardless of ethnicity.” These constituents form a large portion of the electorate and of Sanders supporters. However, with the AIP being the only “independent” group in California, thousands of mistaken independent voters may be surprised on June 7th. The IVP’s proposed universal ballots would prevent these ironic and potentially damaging mistakes.

Bernie had to run as a Democrat despite being an independent. Infiltrating the Democratic Party exponentially boosted his exposure, but may have lost him thousands of independent votes while also exposing himself to be stifled by the Democratic party itself. Hopefully independent voters show up on June 7th and remember the lone wolf Independent representative from Vermont: a vocal mayor, senator, historic congressman and the only candidate demanding fair publicly funded elections.