Vermont's Legislative Assembly has the opportunity to invest in the long-term health of the State's democracy. In particular, it should enact readily available reforms: (1) transition to nonpartisan blanket primary and ranked-choice electoral structure for appropriate offices; (2) revitalize the State's defunct public campaign-financing program; and (3) create a study group to consider other creative methods to encourage voter engagement and augment the vibrancy of our State's civic tradition. The issue: Vermont rightly prides itself on a political tradition of civic engagement and responsive government through its citizen legislature. At the national level, however, signs of democratic decay are on the rise, and there are worrying signs that these maladies are overtaking states as well. The growing role of money in politics, in particular, appears to be shaking faith in public institutions. Additionally, voters may also be frustrated by the polarizing effect of the party primaries and by the inability to vote for a more representative candidate in the general election without "wasting" their vote on a long shot. At the close of the election, the public may again be disappointed to learn that the "victorious" candidate was in fact voted against by the majority of voters, due to a system that allows victory by plurality. Each of these issues frustrate members of the public, whose growing cynicism may discourage them from voting, further undermining democratic legitimacy. It is an unfortunate positive feedback loop, and one that is best addressed through proactive efforts to safeguard democratic legitimacy before problems become entrenched. Solution I: Electoral Structure Reforms. Many of the potential problems of unrepresentative candidates and officeholders are traceable to our current electoral structure. General election candidates are the product of what may be an ideologically polarizing primary process and face the "spoiler effect," discouraging voters from voting with their conscience by potentially putting an unpopular candidate in office when the opposition splits its vote. Well studied, constitutionally sound, and practical reforms are available, which have been successful in other jurisdictions. First, a transition to Ranked-Choice Voting (RCV) in the general election, which allows voters to rank candidates by relative preference, prevents a candidate from claiming victory until receiving the approval of at least 50% of the voters. This ensures that the victor has the support of the majority of the voters and did not win due to the "spoiler effect." Voters, in turn, may vote for their preferred long-shot candidate, knowing that their voice will still be heard even if their first choice is not victorious. Under the Vermont Constitution, this reform may be enacted for all offices except Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and Treasurer--unless there is a constitutional amendment. Second, under an RCV system, the current partisan primary could be replaced with a blanket nonpartisan primary. This avoids the potentially polarizing effect of the party primary system, which can exclude otherwise meritorious candidates with cross-party appeal from the general election ballot. Instead, a blanket nonpartisan primary would narrow the field of candidates to a reasonable number before the general election, while still presenting voters with a diverse menu of ideologies to choose from. Solution II: Campaign-Finance Public-Funding Revitalization. Running for office costs money. There is a reasonable concern among the electorate that those willing to supply those funds often expect something in return from the officeholders they help elect. Some spenders may even try to influence electoral outcomes by dominating the airwaves at a critical moment late in the campaign. On a related note, many worry that elected officials are forced to spend time courting donors at the expense of connecting with their constituents. Though the actual veracity of these various suspicions eludes easy quantification, the appearance of such distortions can engender public cynicism and damage democratic legitimacy. Under Supreme Court precedent, Vermont has few options to limit the flow of money into political campaigns. However, the Supreme Court has generally upheld public campaign financing programs, which can allow candidates to avoid private fundraising and focus on voters instead. This Article analyzes a variety of different options for public-financing programs before settling on the traditional block grant as currently the most administratively practical solution for Vermont. Vermont had such a program for candidates for Governor and Lieutenant Governor, but it fell into disuse as limited funding and onerous restrictions failed to keep pace with the realities of modern campaigning. A recently proposed bill, S.32, attempted to revive this program. This Article analyzes S.32 and other options for revitalizing Vermont's public-financing program. Because effective programs can be expensive, this Article recommends the Legislature consider a partial public-private scheme as an affordable alternative. This Article also recommends expanding the program to include other statewide offices. An Additional Thought: Voter Engagement. An overarching theme of this Article is that democratic distortions can quickly become exaggerated as they cause public cynicism and further depress voter engagement. This Article concludes that Vermont has already taken most available steps to remove barriers to the polls to increase engagement. A statewide vote-bymail program or a voting holiday might help, but this Article suggests an open-ended inquiry into more creative ways to encourage voter and overall civic engagement, based on the growing understanding of voting as a social behavior. Considering ways to support communities as they look for ways to rebuild norms of civic engagement could yield a wide variety of benefits. Conclusion. This Article concludes that Vermont's Legislature is in a good position to invest in the long-term vibrancy of its democracy and guard against the arrival of many of the ills increasingly plaguing politics around the nation. This Article proposes the following practical reforms: (a) transition to RCV voting with blanket nonpartisan primaries; (b) revitalizing Vermont's defunct public campaign financing system; and (c) commissioning a study group to consider further refinements to the State's election laws and opening a discussion of creative ways to encourage renewed civic engagement in the twenty-first century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]