This opinion column was submitted by Ryan Haerer, an Army veteran and volunteer with Veterans for Political Innovation.

I played the odds joining the Army when the U.S. was fighting two wars in the Middle East, and got blown up. But my worst day in the Army was also my luckiest. I was severely wounded, but survived.

Unfortunately, its become alarmingly clear that the country on whose behalf we fought and tried to establish democracy in Iraq now faces increasingly tough odds for a healthy democracy at home.

Nevadans, like everyone else, are politically polarized. Candidates have become more extreme under an election system that incentivizes them playing only to the most politically interested voters on the far left or right. This has alienated everyone else toward the middle, who, regardless of party, understand compromise is sometimes required to solve tough issues. 

Our government’s ability to deliver policy for the good of the people is in a downward spiral. The occasional mention of civil war as a theoretical possibility under these conditions — however slight — ought to make us sit up a little straighter and examine how to fix it. 

Yet, despite the evidence, we continue to hold our elections the same way — expecting different results. 

We’re gambling with our democracy. 

The table stakes for Nevadans and all Americans are growing with each election as challenging policy issues go unresolved in an era of worsening partisanship.

If we don’t modify how we conduct our elections in order to incentivize candidates who will work for country over party, we’re continuing to double down on black for our democracy every time we go to the polls. 

If I hit on black six or eight times in a row, sure, I may win another. But the odds always remain the same. And the house always wins in the end. That doesn’t bode well for a strong democracy. 

Fortunately, voting yes on Question 3, final-five voting, can stack the deck in our democracy’s favor. It’s a critical step toward building it back stronger than it’s ever previously been. 

The built-in incentives with final-five voting mean common sense and compromise among the winners become not just possible, but probable. Government can work well, again. 

More candidates beyond the two parties that currently dominate will become competitive, bringing new combinations of ideas. And candidates become less radical because they must compete for the middle majority who mostly vote in just November elections, and not just play only to the more political extremes that dominate primary elections for the two parties that are held earlier in the year.

That’s critical for better outcomes for Nevada and America, because issues in the real world usually don’t fit neatly into just red or black — or more appropriately in politics, red or blue. Like the 50 percent of veterans who identify as independents, my ideas for policy don’t align with either party. But under final-five voting, I’d likely see a candidate who aligns with several of my cross-party viewpoints be just as competitive as those from the major parties. For example, a candidate may be competitive while believing as I do that:

We must take urgent action on climate change, but unrealistic approaches like banning fossil fuels without renewables online to replace them would result in national economic suicide.

We need to incentivize and invest in our technology and defense sectors more than ever, because the reality is global hard security challenges for the U.S. are growing, with adversarial governments like Iran wanting to hurt us, and competitors like China creating challenges for us across the board. 

We must recognize that America is a melting pot and is strengthened by immigration, but that our current approaches to the southern border has resulted in humanitarian and security disaster. 

And that our national failures on murderous gun violence like the one that killed those 60 innocent people at Mandalay Bay five years ago is beyond sickening, and that as a supporter of the Second Amendment right to bear arms we can and must do more to reduce shootings. 

Right now, chance of a candidate winning with these cross-party viewpoints is like the 5.2 percent chance of landing on green in roulette. Realistically, its more likely closer to zero. 

But final-five voting lets independents, third-parties and moderates within the established parties have a chance against the more extreme candidates. More candidates, more platforms, more common sense results. Our odds of improving our governing outcomes with a successful yes vote on Question 3 is 100 percent.

Nevada has always been a leader in doing things its own way. Do it again for our democracy on Question 3 in November.

Ryan Haerer is an Army veteran and volunteer with Veterans for Political Innovation, a nonprofit with a mission to mobilize veterans and supporters to advocate for election innovations to make our political system less toxic and more competitive.

Have your say: How to submit an opinion column or letter to the editor

This article originally appeared on Reno Gazette Journal: We’re gambling with our democracy