In 2008, there were 33 open primary states in which independent voters could participate in the presidential primaries and caucuses. In these states, 2.7 million independents voted for Barack Obama, giving him the margin of victory to secure the Democratic Party nomination. Party insiders (both Republican and Democratic) are attempting to eliminate open primaries and reassert their control of the electoral process.
40% of the American electorate now identify as independents. While increasing numbers of Americans reject party politics, our electoral process is still regulated by the two parties. The electorate is changing, and our process must change to reflect the make up and preferences of American voters.
Closed primaries have small voter turnouts and are dominated by party loyalists and ideologically driven constituencies. Thus a small segment of the electorate determines who gets to run in the general election.
Open primaries encourage candidates with a broad appeal, who favor pragmatic rather than partisan solutions. They allow for the development of new coalitions of voters and candidates.
Closed primaries favor candidates who are supported by the party establishment and make it nearly impossible for insurgents and new leaders to win elections.
17 states do not allow independents to vote in presidential primaries. Only 21 states allow independents to vote in Congressional primaries. Independents should be guaranteed full voting rights in all federal elections.
The 2008 elections demonstrated that most Americans want to move beyond partisanship and toward a non-ideological, problem-solving orientation in government. Open primaries are an important step in that direction.
If you have been reading this blog you know how I feel about increasing ballot access and the need for open primaries. But the whole process needs to be changed. Here is how I would change the process for municipal, state-wide, congressional, and presidential elections:
1. Parties would have their nominating process (convention, caucus, etc.) and pay for this process.
2. A state run open primary with all candidates including party, independents, and write-ins with the option to designate a political party and endorsements on the ballot.
3. A state run top two general election.
Use the above link to find out more about openprimaries.org and donate so we can promote this concept throughout the United States.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!
Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us 
2 comments:
The evidence shows that there is no correlation between a state's politics, and what type of primary it has. Political Scientist Boris Shor of the University of Chicago studied state legislatures in each state over the last 15 years. Although he found that California had the most polarized and partisan legislature, Washington state had the 2nd most polarized legislature, and Washington has used a blanket primary or a top-two primary most of that period. Other states with highly polarized politics, but with open primaries, are Illinois and Ohio.
Thanks Richard for the comment. What type of system do you think would provide a better way for all voters?
Post a Comment