Chair Ken Martin: Why the Democratic Party must stay neutral in primaries

In recent weeks, there's been renewed conversation about my longstanding support for a neutrality pledge within the Democratic National Committee. Some critics have wrongly framed this as an effort to shut people out of the party or to discourage contested primaries. Let me be unequivocally clear: that's not only false, it's the opposite of what I stand for.

I've always believed that we win elections through addition, not subtraction. The strength of the Democratic Party lies in its diversity of thought, background, and experience. We are the party that welcomes debate and dissent—it's what sets us apart from the Republican Party. Without new voices challenging the status quo, we never would have made progress on critical issues like civil rights, reproductive freedom, or marriage equality. Change doesn't come from the top down; it comes from the grassroots up, from new voices pushing the party to do better, to be better.

That's why l've championed the idea that every Democrat—whether you're young or old, progressive or moderate, rural or urban—deserves a fair and equal voice in our party. A neutrality pledge isn't about silencing anyone. It's about protecting everyone. It ensures that candidates, and the millions of supporters behind them, can participate in our primary process without interference from party leadership. It means no thumb on the scale, no backroom deals, no favoritism.

Imagine the message it would send if party insiders could quietly influence outcomes. If the perception takes hold that decisions are made behind closed doors by a few powerful actors, we risk alienating the very people we claim to represent. That's not democracy. That's not our party. Party officers have one job: to be fair stewards of a process that invites every Democrat to the table—regardless of personal views or allegiances.

This is not a new position for me. After the 2016 election, I helped usher in superdelegate reforms to reduce insider influence. I championed neutrality pledges before they were common practice and successfully enacted a neutrality policy in the Minnesota DFL—one of the most grassroots—driven state parties in the country.

When I ran for DNC Chair, I ran on a platform of democratizing the party. That meant expanding committees to include more voices from the rank and file, giving up unilateral appointment authority in favor of direct elections, and holding ourselves—party officers—to a higher standard of neutrality. These reforms weren't about any one person, and they certainly aren't about me versus David Hogg, someone I deeply respect. They're about principle, not personality. Long before David was ever involved in politics, I was pushing reforms within our Democratic Party—as I've said many times over the years, I represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party and will continue to advocate for a party that is open, fair, transparent and honors the grassroots voices within our Party.

Whether you're a challenger or an incumbent, 18 or 80, the rules must apply equally. Do I have opinions? Of course.

But when you lead the institution tasked with calling the balls and strikes, you don't get to also swing the bat. Our role is clear: let the voters decide, then work like hell to support the nominee they choose.

I am more committed than ever to introduce the slate of structural reforms that enshrine these values into the official rules of the Democratic Party. These reforms will require all party officers—including myself—to remain neutral in primaries. They will ensure no party official can abuse their position to tilt the outcome of an election.

The Democratic Party's charter says it best: “A party which asks for the people's trust must prove that it trusts the people.” That's a principle worth fighting for—and one I intend to uphold, now and as long as I am Chair of this great institution.