The Sad State of State Primaries
By Ron Kahlow | 06/22/2012 | Electoral Reform, Featured, Open Primaries | 11 CommentsState primaries are in a sad state. Many voters don’t understand the importance of primaries. Voter turnout is generally far lower than in general elections. Primaries defeat the principle of representative democracy. Primaries give incumbents a big advantage over challengers. Next Tuesday, New York, Colorado, Oklahoma and Utah have primaries. And, the beat goes on.
One reason for poor turnout is that voters are often ignorant of the importance of primaries. For any office that is safe for a particular party, whoever wins the primary office contest has, in effect, already won the office. The office contest in the November general election is virtually meaningless. In the District of Columbia, almost all of the elected officials are Democrats. The primary election literally determines the DC government. The November DC election is a waste of time and money. Unfortunately many voters are unaware of this, and, by not showing up for the primary, they simply have no say in the selection of the candidate(s) who will represent them.
A second reason for poor turnout is that voters don’t understand primaries and are intimidated by them. Each State can hold a primary election in numerous ways. And, each State has its own rules in the actual execution of its primary. For voters, this makes for a confusing mess. They don’t know what party primary they can vote in. They don’t know how many different ballots there will be. They don’t know what party ballot(s) they can request. They don’t know what will be on the ballot(s). They don’t know what party identification they need. They simply don’t know what is going to happen when they show up at the polls. Worst of all, they can’t even get answers to these questions in advance on the State’s election website. I challenge you to try!
In the case of next Tuesday, New York and Oklahoma will conduct ‘closed’ primaries. Voters may vote only if they are registered member of that party. Independent and non-partisan voters cannot participate. Colorado, however, will conduct a ‘semi-closed’ primary. Registered party members and unaffiliated voters can vote only in a party’s primary. Independents choose a party. But, Utah takes the prize. It will hold a ‘closed’ primary for registered Republicans but will hold ‘open’ primaries for Democrats and Constitution party members. Is it any wonder that voters are turned off by the whole business.
Next Tuesday, all four states will have a separate ballot for each political party. But, that is not the case in all State primaries. Some States use a single ballot for all parties. The voter must choose on the ballot itself which political party’s candidates the voter will select for a contested office. Voters of one party can cross over and vote in another party’s contest, effectively allowing a voter to help choose the opposition’s weakest candidate. Hmmmm!
It is so confusing that formal definitions have been given to the six different ways a primary election can be held, called primary types. Rather than explaining each here, I have added an addendum to this article with the commonly accepted definitions of primary types.
And, what a voter might see on a ballot differs from State to State. In the Tuesday Colorado primary, if there is only one candidate for an office contest, he or she will still appear on ballots. For the other three States, if there is only one candidate for an office, the office contest will not even appear on ballots. Need I go on?
Finally, primaries are a stacked deck in favor of the incumbents. Primaries are supposed to be the vehicle to get new blood into politics. But, just the opposite is the case. When an incumbent is opposed by more than one challenger in a primary, the anti-incumbent vote will be split. This gives the incumbent a big advantage. This flaw in the primary system is one of the reasons why over 95% of incumbents retain their offices.
As a case in point, consider New York’s primary contest for the 13th District U.S. House seat. Charlie Rangel is being opposed by four very strong and competent challengers. Charlie is 82 has been in the U.S. House since 1971. That’s 41 years folks. He was censured by the U.S. House for 11 counts of misconduct and paid a $23,000 civil penalty. Many voters in the 13th District strongly oppose his reelection. But, the anti-Rangel vote will be split between his four challengers and he will most likely win. The 13th District is a safe Democratic district. Welcome back Charlie!
But, there is hope. At least one state, California, has solved the primary problem and is doing it right. It adopted a “Top Two Candidates Open Primary.” All registered voters may vote in the primary, with or without any party affiliation. A voter will be presented with a single ballot containing all the candidates from all of the parties and any independents. The candidates can choose whether or not to list their party preference on the primary ballots. The top two overall vote-getters will move on to the general election. The top two vote getters can be in the same party. Hence, two candidates from the same party can appear on the ballot in the general election. Voters will be afforded the opportunity to choose between the two strongest candidates, regardless of party.
As usual, the golden state is leading the way.
Check out California’s recent primary at Vote-CA.org.
________________________________________
Addendum – Primary Election Types
Closed Primary: Voters may vote in a party’s primary only if they are registered members of that party. Independent and non-partisan voters cannot participate.
Semi-closed Primary: Registered party members and unaffiliated voters can vote only in a party’s primary. Independents either make their choice of party primary privately, inside the voting booth, or publicly, by registering with any party on Election Day.
Multiple Ballot Open Primary: A registered voter may vote in any party primary regardless of his own party affiliation. A voter will be presented with the party ballot the voter requests. Voters of one party can cross over and vote in the primary of another party, effectively allowing a party to help choose its opposition’s weakest candidate.
Single Ballot Open Primary: A registered voter may vote in any party primary regardless of his own party affiliation. A voter will be presented with a single ballot and the voter must choose on the ballot itself which political party’s candidates the voter will select for a contested office. Voters of one party can cross over and vote in the primary of another party, effectively allowing a party to help choose its opposition’s weakest candidate.
Multiple Ballot Semi-open Primary: A registered voter may vote in any party primary regardless of his own party affiliation. A voter identifies his or her party choice in a public declaration in front of an election official and requests a specific party’s ballot. Voters of one party can cross over and vote in the primary of another party, effectively allowing a party to help choose its opposition’s weakest candidate.
Top Two Candidates Open Primary: All registered voters may vote in the primary, with or without any party affiliation. A voter will be presented with a single ballot containing all the candidates from all parties and independents. The top two overall vote-getters – not the top vote-getter from each qualified political party – will move on to the general election. The candidates can choose whether or not to list their party preference on the primary and general election ballots. In essence, political parties can no longer nominate their candidates for these offices and two candidates from the same party can appear on the ballot of the general election.






Leave Your Comment →
11 Comments
Duane Dichiara
06.23.2012
Why does low turnout need a solution?
Bernie Valentine
06.23.2012
I can’t believe someone can believe “low turnout” could be a good thing !?? It is purely a sign that voters “don’t give a sh*t anymore”!!
They have become dis-enfranchised through the “unfairness” of the electoral process; where delegates are the REAL voters and they are selected thru arbitrary party rules controlled by the “good ole boy” networks of the two corrupt parties which are controlled by monetary interests of all the elites and special interest groups. Screw the “citizen voter”….and they see it more and more everyday!
This current season of primaries were a fiasco of corruptness, media biasis, bribery and negative ads…mostly by the “presumptive nominee” long before most states even got to the “polls”!!
Good grief, who the hell would even waste their gas money to go to vote in such cases..anyway?
Carolann Quinn
09.20.2012
@Carolann Quinn
I voted in my primary. Out of the ten offices that were open, I got to really vote in two of them. The rest were either Vote for 3 out of 3 or they were uncontested or no candidate. Then being a Democrat in Arizona means that you may vote 5 miles away from your residence. Yes, to cast a vote in a Presidential primary, I may have to travel 5 miles. Many of the primaries are not even in the same city. Yes, I have skipped some primaries and this is from a person who started pretend voting (they let me play with the example machines in Pennsylvania) at age 10. Until I moved to Arizona, I NEVER missed an election, primary or general.
It also doesn’t help that Arizona has elections whenever the wind blows in the opposite direction. In Pennsylvania, we had 1 in the Spring and 1 in Novemeber. Here, I get to vote once every couple of months. The Presidential primary is seperate from the local which may be seperate from other State officials. It gets old really fast!
They need to make elections more convienient and less who gets to be first on deciding the President. There are too many egos in the elections right now.
Moises Moy Moreno
06.23.2012
in chicago the struggle for political power isnt so much between the parties but from factions within each party. we got machine democrats against reformer democrats. the low voter turnout last march primary was clear indication that voters do not understand politricks because incumbents get reelected yet everybody hates him or her. solution voters need education on how the democratic process works for them. that is the work of organizers not intellectuals to mobilize our electorate. it is possible just hard work
Janet Whitehead
06.23.2012
Probably a good candidate would help….
Janet Whitehead
06.23.2012
In California, it doesn’t matter much…not even in the Primaries…
Duane Dichiara
06.23.2012
Bernie – voters turn out when they think its important ie major races for President, Governor, whatever. When they don’t have what they consider important races on the ballot they don’t turn out. Political parties are the main ‘get out the vote’ drivers – and have as a rule no interest in turning out voters in inter mural primaries. What I’m writing is that turnout has nothing to do with arcane party rules or anything else of that nature. Nothing. In primaries less interested people — and that includes most Decline to State voters — don’t vote because they aren’t interested in politics. If this “independent voter” group wants to do something worthwhile they can start finding out a way to actually get Decline to State voters interested in politics (sidebar – fully half or more of these DTS voters are actually closet Democrats or Republicans, and they are the ones that tend to vote in primaries.)
Steven Ritter
06.24.2012
I think it very common in primaries in general.
Faith Eischen
06.25.2012
@faitheischen
Arizona may be on its way to an open-primary/top-two system too! Looking at the results of California’s 2012 open-primary suggests that the open-primary system is more encouraging/less intimidating to voters, which subsequently leads to more voters showing up. Also, it allows other candidates (like registered independents for example) a better chance in getting to the general elections.
Dr. William J. Kelleher
09.20.2012
@DrWJK
One major problem w/ primaries is that the voter has to vote twice in the election – once in the primary, and again in the general. This is an inconvenience. Take time from work or school. Fight traffic, find parking, wait in line. Only highly motivated voters endure this inconvenience. But those are often the more extreme partisans. They are the ones who elect their kind to Congress.
This can be turned around with Internet voting. Convenience is empowerment. Make voting more convenient, and more people will vote. When more people vote, more moderate votes by ordinary Americans will be cast. When more moderate votes are cast, the partisan gridlock in Washington will diminish, and special interests will have less power. Internet voting can get this country going again! See my series here on Canada – they are way ahead of us on Internet voting. The US suffers from a Moral Panic about the supposed insecurity of Internet voting. Why are we so gullible?
Alex Gauthier
09.20.2012
@alexg
As more voters realize how many voting rules specifically benefit the incumbent, I suspect that more states will adopt similar reforms.