Get free daily email updates

Syndicate this site - RSS

Recent Posts

Blogger Menu

Click here to blog

Jon Fleischman

*Must Read* WSJ’s Steven Moore:

From today’s Wall Street Journal Political Diary E-mail…



Open Season on California Conservatives?

As if Californians don’t have enough problems to worry about, in June voters will decide on whether to switch to a system of open primary elections. Open primaries have long been the dream of the state’s business groups and good government types who want more middle-of-the-road politicians in Sacramento.

However, conservatives in the state are up in arms about the initiative, dubbed "Proposition 14. The goal, having all candidates from the two major parties and all the smaller parties appear on the same ballot, is called a "blanket primary." There would be no separate Republican or Democratic primary ballots. The top two vote-getters regardless of party would go on to appear on the November ballot. If one candidate won more than 50% of the primary vote, that person wins the election and there would be no contest in November.

The measure is strongly supported by a group of moderate businessmen called the Main Street Republicans who want the GOP to dilute its message to grow the party’s appeal. But Conservative Shawn Steel, a former chairman of the California Republican Party and now a Republican National Committee member, says the plan will only help elect "mushy middle" candidates, without core convictions. "The unstated premise," he tells me, "is that sharp philosophical differences between the two parties is unhealthy, and that seeking voter allegiance on such a basis is partisan and therefore bad."

Politics often makes for odd partnerships. In this case, labor unions on the left are also opposing the open primary so they can keep subservient Democrats in office.

Louisiana is one state that uses a blanket primary and the process tends to reward candidates who are moderate and reduce the power of party activists. Mr. Steel and other activists complain that Proposition 14 is the byproduct of a "corrupt bargain" struck in 2009 between liberal Republican state Sen. Abel Maldonado and legislative Democrats. Mr. Maldonado agreed to a big tax increase in exchange for Democrats agreeing to place the open primary system on the June ballot.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is one of the initiative’s lead proponents, putting nearly $500,000 of his own money behind the measure. But it’s not clear his support will help much. The governor’s approval ratings are in the tank and many Californians are already focusing on the governor’s race between Meg Whitman and Jerry Brown. As Republican Congressman Tom McClintock of California says, "Voters are sick and tired of the tax-and-spend failures of Democrats. The state has to change radically or go bankrupt."

The big problem with California’s tilt toward polarized politics isn’t the closed primary system; it’s the gerrymandering that puts the vast majority of incumbents in safe seats with 60% and 70% majorities. That problem wouldn’t be fixed by Prop. 14, which is why many voters are likely to vote "no" on it in November.

— Stephen Moore

Moore nails it with this piece.  Are YOU involved with the campaign to stop Proposition 14?

5 Responses to “*Must Read* WSJ’s Steven Moore:”

  1. tkaptain@sbcglobal.net Says:

    Of course the real reason for the “Open Primary” is that many legislators don’t bother worrying about the concerns of their constituents unless they happen to be registered in their party. This measure allows every voice to be heard.

  2. jon@flashreport.org Says:

    Tom, spoken like someone who doesn’t believe in the political party system. That’s fair, but at the end of the day we expect our elected representatives not have a finger out in the wind, but to be true to their values, their character, and to the positions they articulate on the campaign trail.

    The proponents of this measure want to replace elected officials who are committed to principles instead with officials who will wheel and deal with the insider crowd.

    The losers in that scenario? Californians who are already amongst the highest taxed folks in the country.

  3. tkaptain@sbcglobal.net Says:

    Political parties were created to help ensure that there was always a structure in place for those on the outside to limit the possiblity of an authoritarian structure taking root, but we still vote for individuals, not parties.

  4. boogabooga1114@gmail.com Says:

    The telling point, really, was almost an aside in Moore’s piece:

    “In this case, labor unions on the left are also opposing the open primary so they can keep subservient Democrats in office.”

    I doubt any FlashReporters like to think of themselves as the right’s version of the labor unions, but the point is more moderate Democrats would be a win for the right.

  5. Arrowhead.Ken@Charter.Net Says:

    What a mess. Where is Spatacus?