July 29, 2010
The lawsuit claims SB6 violates the California Constitution because it bars the counting of write-in votes during general elections and allows only state-recognized parties to appear on the ballot.
One of the plaintiffs, Steve Chessin of Mountain View, said, “SB6 is a hastily and poorly written law that was the result of a political backroom deal to secure the tie-breaking vote to pass the 2009 state budget.”
July 29, 2010
The Green Party is planning a suit over the replacement of party primaries with the “top two” system, which is likely to exclude third-party candidates from the runoff ballot in virtually all contested elections. Democratic and Republican leaders, who opposed Prop. 14, are considering separate challenges.
Thursday’s suit in San Francisco Superior Court was more limited, targeting two sections of the new law. However, the plaintiffs asked a judge to block enforcement of Prop. 14 until legislation is passed to remove those two provisions.
July 29, 2010
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger today issued the following statement after a lawsuit was filed in the San Francisco Superior Court to block the implementation of the open primary system approved by California voters under Proposition 14:
“It comes as no surprise that Sacramento special interests are trying to overturn the government reforms Californians overwhelmingly support. I will fight these special interests at every turn to protect these reforms that will break through Sacramento’s dysfunction.”
July 29, 2010
If the lawsuit were to succeed, Proposition 14 would not be rolled back, but the legislature would have to pass a new bill in order to implement an open primary election — reversing the prior dynamic, where legislation in effect awaited voter approval.
“We’re going after a law the state passed,” Dutta said. “We’re not going after Proposition 14.”
July 29, 2010
The complaint filed Wednesday calls the measure unconstitutional. The motion for injunction filed today seeks to block implementation of the new primary.
July 29, 2010
Six people who oppose California’s open primary law are suing to block the state from moving ahead with a new election process.
At the heart of the lawsuit is whether voters can write in a candidate’s name on a general election ballot.
July 29, 2010
As Capitol Alert reported last night, the plaintiffs argue that provisions in Senate Bill 6, accompanying legislation directing the execution of the new system, disenfranchise candidates from minor parties and voters.
Read the complaint, filed this morning in San Francisco Superior Court, here.
July 28, 2010
“People who vote for write-in candidates in the general election will not have their vote counted. They’ll be throwing their votes away without even being told that by voting for a write-in your vote won’t count. And candidates who are from smaller parties will not be able to list their party of choice on the ballot when they run for office,” Dutta said.
Under prop 14 candidates from parties other than state-recognized parties are only allowed to state that they have “No Party Preference” on the ballot.
Dutta’s called that fundamentally “undemocratic”. He’s suing the Secretary of State and county election officials on behalf of candidates from the Socialist Action and the Reform Party and voters from four counties, including Los Angeles and Orange counties.
July 28, 2010
Opponents of Proposition 14 plan to file a lawsuit in San Francisco Superior Court tomorrow seeking to block the state from transitioning to a “top two” primary system. [...] The opponents said in a press release that the lawsuit will argue that the measure disenfranchises voters’ rights by eliminating write-in candidates and discriminates against candidates from parties not recognized by the state.
July 24, 2010
by Ralph Nader
Last month, Big Business interests shamelessly dealt our already depleted democracy a devastating blow by misleading California voters into approving Proposition 14, without their opponents being able to reach the people with rebuttals.
July 10, 2010
Prop 14 sounds radical, but it doesn’t go anywhere near far enough. We’re still left with a Tweedle Dee Dee and Tweedle Dee Dum choice between least undesirable candidates.
July 8, 2010
“If half of the media in California who covered Proposition 14 practiced ethical, balanced journalism, the proposition would have failed hands down,” said Christina Tobin, StopTopTwo.org chair and founder of Free & Equal Elections Foundation. /… “The Los Angeles Times had the worst reporting on Proposition 14. StopTopTwo.org will ensure everyone knows which media outlets lived up to the ethics of balanced coverage,” Tobin said. “There are also those who did an excellent job, and the public will know who they can turn to for fair and balanced coverage.”
July 8, 2010
Having won over California voters, Peace’s movement is going national. New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg has impaneled a commission that is, among other things, exploring an open primary initiative for New York City’s November ballot. (Bloomberg is the founder of Bloomberg LP, which owns Bloomberg News and Bloomberg Businessweek.) Voters elsewhere may soon be considering the option as well.
July 8, 2010
Without much fanfare or debate, California voters, weary, frustrated and apparently getting more passive by the proposition, approved Prop 14 this past June.
July 7, 2010
The “top two” primary system is not going to change the realities of partisan polarization and one-party domination of large areas of California. Given the sharp ideological divide between Democratic and Republican voters, liberal Democrats will continue to dominate elections in Democratic regions of the state and conservative Republicans will continue to dominate elections in Republican regions of the state.
July 7, 2010
The “top two” system does not provide any particular incentive for winning an actual majority of votes in a primary; the top finisher still must face the runner-up in the general election, where turnout is very likely to be much higher. So the safe thing to do is to nail down a general election spot by appealing to partisans (Prop 14 does not repeal party registration, which means that candidates will know exactly whom to contact with partisan messages), while beginning the general election campaign by going after the other party’s preferred candidate.
July 1, 2010
Sean Haugh, executive director of The Free and Equal Elections Foundation, expressed his opposition to the proposition, explaining, “The two candidates with the most name recognition and money to start with will be more successful, leaving others off the general election ballot. Just as significant is that there will be no voice for people to organize… [and be] heard by those who can be elected.”
June 30, 2010
Come late summer or early fall 2012, voters are going to wake up and wonder why they only have two choices. There will no longer be Peace and Freedom Party, Libertarian Party, Green Party or American Independent Party candidates on the general-election ballot. Independent candidates will no longer be allowed to qualify for the general-election ballot.
To top it off, write-in votes will no longer be counted in the general election. ///
The top-two system was invented in Louisiana in 1975. Louisiana has had 35 years of experience with it. I am amazed that people will speculate about how it will work and not actually discuss what really happened in Louisiana.
In 35 years, no minor party candidate ever qualified for the second round.
June 28, 2010
“We believe Proposition 14 will fall. It sets an unacceptably high threshold for participation in the general election,” said Michael Feinstein, a former Santa Monica mayor who is national co-chair of the Green Party.
June 27, 2010
“Hopefully, California will discard the top-two primary system and consider different and better options.” – Dr. Joseph Kolacinski is an assistant professor in Elmira College’s Department of Mathematics.
June 27, 2010
Supporters of the “top two” system are talking of importing it to other states, and Colorado would seem to be a prime target. (StopTopTwo.org – 15 articles from 12 states plus D.C. pushing Top Two.)
June 26, 2010
California, first with its Proposition 11 two years ago and with its Proposition 14 this year, is setting the trend. (StopTopTwo.org – 14 articles from 11 states plus D.C. pushing Top Two.)
June 25, 2010
Washington state’s electoral system is different from the rest of the country, unlike the party primaries and general elections that we’re used to. And that system is spreading — so pollsters around the country better get used to it.
Washington state uses the “Top Two” electoral system.
June 23, 2010
“StopTopTwo.org is alive and kicking, and we are going to continue fighting this Top Two election system wherever it pops up,” Christina Tobin said. “This doesn’t stop with Proposition 14 in California. StopTopTwo.org will keep our eyes on the nation to make sure the public is educated about better election system options than Top Two.”
June 22, 2010
Instead, in an uncharacteristic show of reasonableness, Californians told the political parties where they could go: off the ballot. Earlier this month, voters on the left coast approved Proposition 14, which replaces primaries with what are essentially non-partisan elections, of the sort we use in city races. (StopTopTwo.org – 13 articles from 10 states plus D.C. pushing Top Two.)
June 21, 2010
Sooner or later, it’s coming to Idaho. (StopTopTwo.org – 12 articles from 9 states plus D.C. pushing Top Two.)
June 17, 2010
There is no such thing as a ‘wasted vote’ with Instant Runoff Voting. IRV eliminates the ‘lesser of two evils’ problem, encourages positive campaigns, and empowers grassroots activists. Top Two is fake reform. Top Two cuts off most of the debate five months before the election, and raises the money barrier for winning elections, making it easier for wealthy special interests to drown out the voice of average citizens. Top Two reduces your voice by banning write-in votes, and forcing you to pick from only two choices in the general election.
June 17, 2010
I agree. Our political culture is far too partisan in part because of our system for choosing candidates. Adopting open primaries might well just open the door to a better and fairer political system.
In any event, it is worth a try. (StopTopTwo.org – Texas, Arizona, Virgina/2, New Mexico, Florida, and Michigan/2.)
June 17, 2010
Proposition 14 is really the great vote silencer.
June 17, 2010
Green Party gubernatorial candidate Laura Wells has her campaign issue against Democrat Jerry Brown – Proposition 14. She says that Brown, who came out in favor of the open primary measure Tuesday – a week after voters approved it – aided the measure’s victory by rigging the ballot language. “It’s not the voters’ fault, but the fault of Brown and the corporations who fully intend to manipulate the rest of us for their financial gain,” Wells said in a statement.
June 16, 2010
“Hewlett-Packard’s major financial support of Proposition 14 was disgusting. Our organization will never again buy any products bearing the Hewlett-Packard label, and I urge all taxpayers who will be disenfranchised by Proposition 14 to do the same.”
June 16, 2010
“It makes me sick, this state is so dysfunctional,” says Los Angeles real estate developer Brian Harvey, who contributed $100,000 to support the measure. “I think this will attract more moderate candidates.” Other backers such as Netflix (NFLX) Chief Executive Officer Reed Hastings ($257,000), Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) ($100,000), and the California Chamber of Commerce ($720,000) hope that the new system, in which the top two candidates chosen by all registered voters would face off in general elections, will bring more moderation to California politics. “I’m a lifelong Democrat, but I’m a centrist,” says Los Angeles philanthropist Eli Broad, who gave $100,000 to the Prop 14 cause. “Because of labor interests on the left and antitax folks on the extreme right, nothing gets done.”
June 15, 2010
The downside, though, is that the state’s primary essentially becomes the first of two general elections — meaning candidates need to spend the time and money reaching out earlier to voters outside their party.
One thing everyone agrees on, though, is what’s on California voters’ minds: a desire for something different.
“All they’re looking for is something that’s going to fix what they see as a broken political system,” said Republican Dan Schnur, director of the California Fair Political Practices Commission.
June 14, 2010
Further, a lot of voters wouldn’t find “choice” in the general election. You could still end up with two right-wing Republicans or two left-wing Democrats on the November ballot. In this conservative area, liberals may not even get to cast a symbolic vote for a Democrat — they’d likely have to choose between two Republicans or sit out the election. But I’d argue that if 60 percent of primary voters opt for a conservative, that’s a pretty good indication of the type of person the general population wants in office. … Like Michigan. Can we try it here? (StopTopTwo.org – Texas, Arizona, Virgina/2, New Mexico, Florida, and Michigan.)
June 14, 2010
And that explains why Virginia might need a proposition 14 here.
June 14, 2010
Third and even fourth and fifth parties have been an American tradition. They seldom win elections but their presence on a general election ballot is an opportunity to be heard. Liberal and conservative, they have always been with us. Proposition 14 puts an end to this American tradition.
June 13, 2010
Under the current imperfect administration of the Universe, most new ideas are false, so most ideas for improvements make matters worse. Given California’s parlous condition, making matters worse there requires ingenuity, but voters managed to do so last Tuesday.
June 13, 2010
Beware of wealthy “reformers” bearing promises to weaken the influence of America’s political parties in the name of creating a more perfect union.
It usually turns out that raw hunger for power, not the civic good, is their motive.
A case in point is California’s recently passed Proposition 14, which will replace party primary elections for nearly all offices in the state with a system in which candidates compete in an open primary and the top two finishers advance to a general election.
It’s a deeply flawed idea that the rest of the nation must avoid.
June 13, 2010
Last week the voters of California took a radical step and more or less abolished party primary elections. If it’s true that what happens in California politics eventually gets exported to Florida, this raises interesting questions for us. (StopTopTwo.org – Texas, Arizona, Virgina, New Mexico, and Florida.)
June 13, 2010
The theory is that if all voters get to screen all candidates at primary time, rather than partisans selecting from fellow partisans, then those on the ideological extremes may be weeded out.
But the theory is largely untested, and the costs could be high. Minor parties and independents and mavericks would likely have a harder time finding a path to the November ballot. Moreover, leaders of the two major parties fear that without an enforceable party role in the nomination of candidates, the struggle to counter the divisive forces represented by wealthy interest groups and self-financed, ambitious or famous individuals will not just infect politics but dominate it. They argue that, especially in light of the Supreme Court decision, elections could become auctions.
June 13, 2010
Last week, voters in California may have come up with an answer. Proposition 14 will scrap the traditional primary system, with GOP voters selecting one nominee and Demo voters the other. Instead, all candidates get thrown into the same pot, and the two with the most votes advance to the general election.
It is hoped the change will end the traditional electoral square dance, where Republican candidates promenade right and Democrats promenade left for the primary, then both try to do-se-do back to the center for the general election. (StopTopTwo.org – Texas, Arizona, Virginia, and New Mexico.)
June 13, 2010
A recently approved California law has the potential to save the centrists. Proposition 14 has become Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s pet proposal. He fought hard for the idea and raised $5 million to support a revised primary plan called the Top Two Primary system. (StopTopTwo.org – First Texas, then Arizona, now Virginia.)
June 12, 2010
California voters have endorsed a dramatic change that will likely be challenged in court. Isn’t everything? But this idea is not far-fetched. There is a nascent effort to impose such a fully open primary system on Arizona’s polarized politics. Watch for it.
There’s no guarantee it would improve the quality of candidates or campaigns. Past election reforms, like public funding and term limits, didn’t help. (StopTopTwo.org – First Texas, then Arizona.)
June 12, 2010
“I am 100% for both of these reforms. The polarization that led to gridlock in California is going to be the norm in Texas.” – (Top Two coming to you next, and they are already mistakenly calling it an open primary.-StopTopTwo.org)
June 11, 2010
Political Scientist John J. Pitney, Jr. notes: “In states that have tried similar election procedures, there is little evidence that a more moderate political culture has resulted.”
Further, I would point out that the likelihood will remain that the voters who will turn out for the “primary” (i.e., the first round) will still be the more hardcore/partisan/ideological voters as opposed to the larger and likely more moderate voters who turn out for the general election (i.e., the second round). As such, this change does not alter a basic structural aspect of the process (i.e., the electorate that choose the top two is not the same as the electorate that chooses the officeholder–which is true of primaries in general).
June 11, 2010
Voters who prefer their political menu seasoned with the spices provided by minor parties are pretty much out of luck. Under Proposition 14, such parties — Green, Libertarian, etc. — which previously could place candidates on November ballots, will almost always be excluded from those by failing to run first or second in primaries.
But, then, blandness is the point of this reform. It seeks to generate a homogenized political class, one not lumpy with liberals and conservatives who, being conviction politicians, do not always play well with others.
June 10, 2010
“I’d say this is extinction for third parties,” says Richard Winger, editor of Ballot Access News, a 25-year-old publication focused on election law and political parties. To advance to a general election contest, third-party candidates will now have to compete against usually better organized and funded Democrats and Republicans in the wide-open primary contests — matchups in which they are highly unlikely to finish in the top two. And the new measure does not allow write-in candidates.
June 9, 2010
“Throughout the primary election season, Prop 14 supporters hammered voters with deceptive and hypocritical messages – from false claims about how the measure would cure all of Sacramento’s ills to the misleading ballot language itself,” stated Christina Tobin, chair of StopTopTwo.Org. “Big business and big government won yesterday. If StopTopTwo.Org had half the funding that Schwarzenegger’s group had, we would have been better equipped to spread the truth and would have won by a very wide margin. Simply put, voters were tricked into supporting this terrible measure by corrupt politicians and big business interests.”
June 8, 2010
Opponents of Proposition 14, the June 8 ballot measure that would limit the number of candidates in general elections to only two, will hold two election night events:
Sacramento: 2868 Northgate Blvd, Suite 103 starting at 7:30 p.m.
Oakland: Humanist Hall, 390 – 27th St. between Broadway and Telegraph, starting at 8:00 p.m.
On hand in Sacramento and [...]
June 8, 2010
“Proposition 14 is like a Trojan Horse that needs to be stopped,” said Christina Tobin, … and chairwoman of StopTopTwo.org, an anti-Prop 14 Web site.
The group is upset because “only two candidates will appear on the November ballot, even two candidates from the same party, and write-in candidates will no longer be allowed,” it writes on the site, adding, “Currently in the November election each party’s candidates competes against each other along with any independents, giving voters more than two choices along with the write-in option.”
June 8, 2010
In this morning’s press release, Christina Tobin, chair of StopTopTwo.Org, an anti-Prop. 14 group, writes:
“Proposition 14, also known as the Top Two Primaries Act, is a dangerous ‘electoral reform’ measure … The measure eliminates party primaries, enables candidates to mask their party affiliation from voters, and only the top two vote-getters advance to the general election, limiting voter choice. Under Prop 14, voters could be forced to choose between two republicans or two democrats in the general election or not vote at all. Smaller parties and independents would not stand a chance.”
June 8, 2010
If this ballot measure passes, the frightening unintended consequences will be other states following California’s tyrannical example. This is not the kind of electoral “reform” we want spreading throughout our country. It limits voter choice and gives more control to corporations.
June 7, 2010
Voters in many of our gerrymandered districts would only see candidates of a single party on the November ballot, and as evidenced in the state of Washington, reelection rates skyrocket to nearly 99%, well above the incumbency rates seen in the Soviet Politburo at the height of the Cold War…
June 7, 2010
To hear proponents of Proposition 14, you would think that implementing an open primary in California would provide greater choice to voters, fix the state’s budget mess, and bring peace and harmony to Sacramento (and the world at large). Sadly, this “reform” will not improve the state’s electoral system—much less its budget problems—and will only disenfranchise more voters by reducing their choices and their freedom of association with the political party of their choice. The good news is that better electoral and budgetary reforms are out there, and Californians should embrace them before the state gets mired even deeper in its current morass.
June 7, 2010
Ralph Nader will speak today against Proposition 14, the Top Two Primaries Act that Gov. Schwarzenegger, Lt. Gov. Abel Maldonado, and the California Chamber of Commerce are pushing onto Californians. Nader is scheduled to speak on Ron Owen’s KGO show at 9:30 a.m. PDT on Monday.
June 7, 2010
Every so often, a proposition comes up that seems to be the cure to the ills that plague our state but in reality is nothing but a replacement for the tough reforms that have to be made. Proposition 14 is one example of such populist pandering. … Further, we are concerned about the effect of this ballot proposition on third party voices that would effectively be shut out between the primary and the election. This measure’s supporters do not have much empirical evidence to support their claims, but the danger of Prop. 14 is clear. Vote ‘no’ on 14.
June 7, 2010
In all, proponents have spent more than $4.6 million on the measure. It’s being bankrolled by Gov. Schwarzenegger’s political committee ($2 million) and the state Chamber of Commerce ($750,000). Other noteworthy donors include Reed Hastings, CEO of Netflix ($257,000), the state hospital association ($250,000) and the state association of health underwriters ($200,000). Among other donors are Steve Bechtel, former head of the giant construction concern ($10,000), former eBay executive and Democratic candidate for governor Steve Westly ($5,000), and the Jack in the Box hamburger chain ($2,500.)
Opponents have spent less than $250,000.
June 6, 2010
This proposition flat out screws the minor parties. This glaring selfishness is made embarrassingly worse by the fact that several independent supporters I have communicated with, or read explanations of their reasoning for support, of the proposition have actually touted this as a way of further marginalizing these minor parties. This rings of a bully at school taking his anger out on even smaller kids because his bigger brothers have been beating on him for years. In fact, this is precisely what this is.
I’m not going to split hairs on this issue. Independents that support this bill should be ashamed of themselves.
June 5, 2010
Opponents claim the proposition actually would reduce voter choices, with only two candidates in the general election. They assert that intraparty general elections would leave little ideological contrast, forcing personality-based campaigns and mudslinging. The single ballot primary, they allege, would strongly favor those candidates with the deepest pockets.
“Literally, it would squeeze voters out of the entire electoral process,” Tobin said.
June 5, 2010
Supporters of the mislabeled open primary initiative say it would produce more ‘moderate’ state leaders. In reality, Prop. 14 would increase the corrupting influence of money in politics and remove smaller parties from the general election ballot.
June 5, 2010
SACRAMENTO – Opponents of Prop 14, the June 8 ballot measure that would limit the number of candidates in general elections to just two, will hold an election night press availability at 2868 Northgate Blvd, Suite 103 starting at 7:30 p.m.
Other anti-Prop 14 election night events will be announced soon in Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area.
June 4, 2010
Two leading political scientists, Boris Shor and Seth Masket, have studied the polarization problem extensively. Their findings show that Proposition 14 will not solve California’s partisanship problem.
June 4, 2010
Foes of the initiative, who have organized a “Stop Top Two” campaign, note that, “The top two vote getters, even if both of them get less than 10% and they are from the same party, would advance to the November election.”
Worse yet, “Proposition 14 forbids voters from write-in candidates for the November election, so if Top Two passes California voters will no longer have more than two choices in the November election; except for the Presidential race.”
That’s a constrained democracy that offers voters less rather than more.
June 4, 2010
Opponents claim the proposition actually would reduce voter choices, with only two candidates in the general election. They assert that intraparty general elections would leave little ideological contrast, forcing personality-based campaigns and mudslinging. The single ballot primary, they allege, would strongly favor those candidates with the deepest pockets.
“Literally, it would squeeze voters out of the entire electoral process,” Tobin said.
June 4, 2010
“It’s the political cleansing of candidates,” charges Christina Tobin, chair of a* “No on 14″ campaign. She fears that if voters are allowed to cross party lines during the primary, they’ll place candidates on the November ballot who stand for nothing and cater to the middle-of-the-road vote. And she argues that third-party candidates, such as the Libertarian and Green parties, will face nearly impossible obstacles.
June 4, 2010
The major parties will no doubt find ways around Prop 14 (Republicans are already saying as much in the press), but the minor parties will, no doubt, suffer. Should their candidate not be one of the top two vote getters in June — an unlikely case in most races — that party will no longer appear on the November ballot. Also left out of Prop 14 — write-in candidates. The measure’s architect, Steve Peace, maintains that both problems can be addressed by the Legislature and governor modifying the state’s election’s code.
June 4, 2010
IN THIS STATE, the Democratic and Republican parties rarely agree on anything – but both oppose Proposition 14. Although its misleading ballot title promises to increase the “right to participate in primary elections,” the measure actually imposes major new limits on voters.
By eliminating party primaries, Proposition 14 would deny all political parties – and their voters – the right to choose a nominee to run in a general election.
June 4, 2010
“If Proposition 14 passes, the Green Party, the Peace and Freedom Party, the American Independent Party, and the Libertarian Party, to name a few, will be denied spots on general election ballots” said Schelen.
Added Pruner, “it is completely un-American to deny an opportunity in elections to other ideas and political parties. All political parties start out as small parties at one time or another.”
June 4, 2010
The title and wording of Proposition 14 is extremely misleading. It claims to increase democracy when, in fact, it actually diminishes democracy by denying small parties a voice in the November elections.
Proposition 14 is funded and supported by Gov. Schwarzenegger’s “Dream Team” of corporate interests. Its real purpose is to eliminate diversity of choice and to further consolidate power in the major, corporate-funded and corporate-controlled Republican and Democratic parties.
June 3, 2010
The result of the top-two election system is the systematic elimination of any choice for voters other than Republican or Democrat in the general election, unless a third party can overcome one of the two “major parties” in the primary.
We therefore urge California voters to vote NO on Proposition 14 if they wish to retain their constitutionally guaranteed right to vote for the candidate of their choice in each and every election.
June 3, 2010
In summary, the Top Two Primary has not solved any problems, and it has created new ones. Incumbents still rule the legislature.
The Top Two is not a solution. It is a problem. We urge you to vote, “NO” on Prop. 14.
June 3, 2010
Mark Hinkle, newly elected chair of the National Libertarian Party, and former chair of the Libertarian Party of California, issued the following statement today about California’s Proposition 14, the “Top-Two” elections measure:
“Californians, please vote NO on Proposition 14. This is not the change we need. This Top Two system will shut out all but two voices in our November elections, which are the elections that count. Now more than ever, we need more political voices and broader representation on the November ballot, but this proposition will do just the opposite.”
June 3, 2010
It is being sold as a way to crush Party inner circle poobahs from having too much power in choosing who gets to be the candidate. But third party activists from the Libertarian Party to Ralph Nader see it as just a way to ensure there is no possible third party choice for voters in [...]
June 3, 2010
But there are too many side effects to Prop. 14 for us to endorse it, not the least of which is an exclusion of political parties from the electoral process.
We’re all for nonpartisan campaigns, but in a primary election, Democrats need to stand behind Democrats, Republicans behind Republicans, and so forth, to guarantee that the chosen candidate for a particular party gets a spot on a general election ballot. Sometimes, tradition is good, and we mean in the tried-and-true sense.
June 3, 2010
As the writers point out, Proposition 14 will reduce our choices of candidates. Only two voices will be heard between the primaries and the general election in November, rather than many. A race on the November ballot will have only two candidates, and they would almost certainly be a Democrat and a Republican, or two Democrats, or two Republicans.
If you don’t like either candidate, Proposition 14 will prevent you from writing in another candidate.
June 2, 2010
Ralph Nader, who has run for president both as an independent and as a third-party candidate, today warned against the ballot proposition promoted by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. “Californians need to defeat Proposition 14 or they will risk further entrenching the two-party system,” stated Nader.
June 2, 2010
Louisiana used a Top Two system for nearly 30 years (1978-2006), during which only one incumbent member of Congress was ever defeated. Under the Top Two system in Washington state in 2008, only one incumbent was defeated in 140 total races. The degree to which this measure suppresses competition in the general election makes Prop 14 better named “The Incumbent Protection Act.”
I urge voters who care about keeping more choices in the general election to vote No on Prop 14.
June 1, 2010
“I really don’t think you want two parties that are similar,” Poizner told a town hall meeting at the La Jolla Recreation Center. “You want two parties that are different. Let them battle it out.” He also said California’s four minor political parties — the American Independent, Green, Libertarian and Peace and Freedom Parties — would be virtually precluded from participating in general elections because their candidates would almost never finish in the top two. “It’s going to destroy third parties,” he said.
June 1, 2010
Leaders from Washington State’s Third Party Coalition released a statement today urging California voters to vote no on Proposition 14. The coalition is comprised of the American Heritage Party, Constitution Party, Green Party, Libertarian Party, and Progressive Party. The Top Two Primary System in Action — The Experience of Third Parties in Washington State
June 1, 2010
Prop. 14 also has a hidden zinger in it that would remove the Peace and Freedom and Libertarian parties from the ballot. But so far only one daily newspaper has mentioned it — the San Francisco Chronicle, in a March 11 story by Wyatt Buchanan. The state ballot pamphlet says nothing about this particularly nasty detail of Prop. 14.
June 1, 2010
WHAT if you opened up your November ballot and discovered that your only two choices for attorney general were both Republicans? Or that your only two choices for lieutenant governor were both Democrats? It makes no sense to give any party a monopoly in our elections. It makes no sense to rashly embrace the [...]
May 29, 2010
Here are the top two reasons to reject Prop 14, also called the “Top Two” Primary. First, Prop 14 will stifle political competition and debate. Second, Prop 14 will deprive voters of a full range of candidate choices.
May 27, 2010
Just like term limits were supposed to help solve Sacramento’s problems and only made things worse, this proposal too will do nothing to solve the real root of the problem—too much money from special interests pouring into campaigns… With the new system, members of party A might vote for the “weakest” candidate of party B to get elected in the primary so that party A has an easier-to-beat opponent in the general. Here’s another example. The new system is like saying that members of the Ku Klux Klan should be able to vote in the elections of the American Civil Liberties Union, and vice versa. Does that make any sense? Vote No!
May 27, 2010
The Green Party of California opposes Proposition 14 because it would reduce voter choice and political voice across political lines, while unfairly favoring incumbents, big money and party insiders.
By eliminating party primaries, expanding the number of voters that primary candidates have to reach and effectively front-loading the election process, Proposition 14 would put even greater emphasis on name recognition and early fundraising, increasing the corrupting influence of money and making it harder for competing candidates and movements to survive, let alone contend.
May 27, 2010
Proposition 14 would abolish party primaries and establish a single, nonpartisan, open primary. Voters will be asked to choose a single candidate from among all candidates running from all parties, plus independents and write-ins.
Only the two candidates who get the most votes will appear on the ballot in the general election. [...]
May 26, 2010
In California, the measure is being backed by an eclectic roster of businessmen and politicians, including Lewis Wolff, a real estate developer and the owner of the Oakland A’s baseball team; Steve Westly, a former Democratic candidate for governor; and John W. Thompson, chairman of Symantec and a supporter of President Obama.
May 26, 2010
StopTopTwo.Org announces two events for Wednesday:
The San Francisco Labor Council will hold a press conference at noon. The anti-Proposition 14 press conference will feature all six qualified political parties.
Marin Libertarian Party’s Pre-Primary Event “Liberty, Fiscal Responsibility and Change [...]
Paid for by concerned citizens like you (click for list)
You can also listen to what Ralph Nader has to say about Top Two here
30 Second Spot
30 Second Spot - Sign Language Version
No on 14 by Adrian Galysh
Click the image below to view/download PDF
Click the image below to view/download PDF
Proposition 14 as seen on 2010 mail-in ballot
What the ballot language fails to mention is that in the election that counts, the general election, we wont be able to choose "any candidate". We'll have only two choices -- and if you want to write in a name, forget it. Write-in votes will be banned. An odd way to "increase the right to participate" !
In reality, we're being sold the illusion of participation. A blanket primary like Top Two requires more money to win, making the influence of money even greater. Then, the candidates with the most special interest money will be our ONLY choices in November.
 |
CfER Prop 14 Fact Sheet |
|
California Teachers Association Flyer |
|
Letter to California Chambers of Commerce |
 |
Letter to San Diego ACLU |
Stop Top Two Bumper Sticker
Radio Interviews and Programs
More Primary Politics and Proposition 14
Prop 14's Awful Impact
Mike Feinstein on KCBS/KCAL
"Prop 14 is a Lie" Commercial
Top Two Debate: Winger vs. Maldonado
San Francisco Labor Council Event
Sacramento Press Conference
Stop Top Two press conference on KGET
Christina Tobin at UW-Madison
Why you should vote NO on Prop. 14
Christina Tobin on Fox News
Top Two Debate Videos
May 25, 2010
In Washington and Louisiana, where this system has already been tried, only one incumbent in each state has been defeated in a primary election. That isn’t one per election — that is one, total. In Louisiana, this is for a period of 35 years!
May 25, 2010
Prop. 14 is the result of collusion between an ambitious politician, newly appointed Lt. Gov. Abel Maldonado, and entrenched Sacramento spending interests. A year ago, then-Senator Maldonado, a Republican, sold his vote for the most massive tax increase in the history of all 50 states, in return for an agreement to place a measure [...]
May 24, 2010
There’s no doubt that California’s political system isn’t working well right now, but Proposition 14 doesn’t guarantee that it will make it work any better. In the long run, the unintended consequences of Proposition 14 make it an unpalatable choice. Vote no on Proposition 14.
May 22, 2010
Often times the cure is worse than the disease. June 8, we’ll be looking at another initiative, Proposition 14, that seems likely to exacerbate every disease it seeks to cure…
May 22, 2010
As primary day approaches, negative campaign ads are on the rise. When asked, most voters are firmly against negative campaign ads and if you are one of them, then you will hate Prop 14. One of the unintended side-effects of Prop 14–and there are many–is that the number of negative ads [...]
May 22, 2010
Californians for Electoral Reform opposes Proposition 14 on the June 8, 2010 statewide ballot. Almost all of our work on this issue is being done through participation in StopTopTwo.org, a broad coalition that includes many electoral reform and ballot access organizations, as well as [...]
May 21, 2010
When runoff elections happen right away, via instant run off voting, or withing just a couple of weeks, they are part of the same campaign. This proposition will force candidates to run two district-wide campaigns, almost half a year apart. This could make running for office more expensive. Increasing that cost is not attractive, since [...]
May 20, 2010
This proposition would allow candidates to not name a party affiliation or preference, and allow the top two vote getters to face-off in the General Election. We do not believe that this is in the interest of the voter, or that candidates should be allowed to not name their party affiliation. Voters have [...]
May 19, 2010
In practice, experts suggest this means that voters in many California districts will choose between two Democrats, while perhaps in a handful of districts two Republicans will survive the primaries and run against each other. They also ponder the likelihood that this shift will merely put more emphasis on candidates’ ability to raise money early [...]
May 19, 2010
We think the argument for the idea, endorsed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, sounds better than the reality. The proponents assume that a “top two” primary system will push candidates to the middle, eliminate the stranglehold the far right and left have over the Republican and Democratic parties, and help moderate the Legislature. We don’t [...]
May 18, 2010
If “moderate” voters are under-represented by politicians of the existing political parties, the solution is not a futile attempt to customize the voting rules in their favor. The solution is a new centrist political party. We also need healthy socialist and other parties to represent other points of view. Instead of weakening political parties, we [...]
May 18, 2010
CRP passed a measure at its March convention that would allow state and county GOP central committees to anoint the preferred Republican candidate in the primary.
This would not prevent other Republicans from running in the primary, but it would give the chosen one a leg up by allowing them to campaign as the GOP endorsed candidate. That candidate would also be the only one the GOP could spend money on to help get elected.
May 17, 2010
For registered members of California’s minor parties, Proposition 14 isn’t just about winning or losing elections.
It’s a matter of survival.
“It pretty much wipes us out,” said John Reiger, former congressional candidate for the Peace and Freedom Party.
May 17, 2010
Duane Roberts, Green Party candidate for U.S. Senate, says Prop 14 is a “power grab” by big business interests that will disenfranchise millions of Californians by limiting their choices at the polls. Roberts urges voters to reject this “unprecedented attack on democratic rights”
May 16, 2010
Tobin, 28, says one of the chief reasons she is running is to guarantee that future California ballots will feature that same range of choice. She is using her candidacy to challenge Proposition 14, the so-called open ballot initiative, which will also be on the November ballot.
May 14, 2010
“Essentially the two candidates with the deepest pockets, the ones with the most wealth will be the ones on the ballot in the general election,” said Christina Tobin, who heads the Web site StopTopTwo.Org
Tobin pushes proportional representation as an alternative to the top-two, open primary system.
May 13, 2010
Expanding the electoral process to encourage more people to vote is a noble objective. Rigging the system in a way that could deceive voters is not.
California has tried several times to reform its primary process in a way that erases the line between political parties and encourages more people to participate, [...]
May 13, 2010
The reality is, Prop 14 isn’t what it claims to be. Not only will it drastically limit “voter choice,” but it will alter the structure of the electoral system in such a way that it will give big business interests and the wealthy an upper hand on the kinds of candidates that get elected to public office.
May 13, 2010
Protests uniting voters across the political spectrum will be held outside two scheduled Proposition 14 fundraisers in Los Angeles and Sacramento sponsored by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. California voters from all six qualified parties, as well as independents, will be in attendance.
May 13, 2010
In 2003, we had an election similar to what Prop 14 proposes. There were 135 candidates on the ballot plus 28 qualified write-in candidates for one office, Governor. Under Prop 14 general election write-in votes would no longer be counted. No runoff election was allowed in 2003. Under Prop 14, a [...]
May 12, 2010
Proposition 14 on the June 8 ballot would make two dramatic changes to the system of elections in California. In the primary election, state and congressional (but not presidential) candidates from all political parties would compete together in a single open primary. All candidates from all political parties would appear on the same ballot. In the general election, only candidates who finished first or second in the open primary would compete against each other in a run-off — even if those candidates were from the same party.
May 12, 2010
Sacramento was witness to a rarified event on May 11th. According to at least one reporter, she had never seen a press conference where each of California’s political partys stood together – literally and figuratively – and so it was at the “No on Prop 14″ press conference. The Republican Party, the Democrat Party, the [...]
May 12, 2010
By eliminating party primaries, Proposition 14 would put greater emphasis on name recognition and early fundraising, increasing the corrupting influence of big money and making it harder for competing candidates and movements to survive, let alone contend. Because of the additional pressure not to “split the primary vote” of their [...]
May 11, 2010
Prop 14 was put on the ballot through the backroom dealings of State Senator (not Lt. Gov.) Abel Maldonado, the very last holdout on the budget this year. He used the budget crisis for his own profit and one of his demands was to put this measure on the ballot. Now, his reckless action is being opposed by every political party in California and numerous electoral reform groups, groups ranging from the NAACP to the Southern California Tax Revolt Coalition.
May 10, 2010
A press conference uniting leaders across the political spectrum will be held in Sacramento on Tuesday. The speakers will discuss their opposition to Proposition 14, the Top Two Primaries Act.
California leaders from the American Independent, Democratic, Green, Libertarian, Peace and Freedom, and Republican Parties will be in attendance.
May 6, 2010
If two Democrats file, and there are six Republicans and two Democrats on the August 2010 primary ballot, it is highly likely that the two Democrats will place first and second, leaving no Republican on the November ballot…
May 4, 2010
Prop 14 is propped up by false promises. Given that so many voters will be all but disenfranchised or have no real choice at all, why would anyone support a rule change with no track record of success?…
May 4, 2010
Proposition 14 on the ballot in the June primary was placed there by a reluctant legislature to secure the vote of then-Senator Abel Maldonado (R-Santa Maria) for the 2009 budget deal. Maldonado’s idea would eliminate party primaries with the hope that political strife in California would decline if more moderate legislators [...]
April 30, 2010
A “top two” system would likely offer even more protection for incumbents than our current primaries. “Top two” primaries have been used in Louisiana from the 1970s to 2006 and in Washington in 2008, and in all those races, only two incumbent Congress members were defeated for re-election (not counting one [...]
April 28, 2010
Proposition 14 advocates never seem to mention that a “top-two” system has already been tried in two states, Louisiana and Washington. Proposition 14 advocates insist that a “top-two” system will elect more moderates, and fewer left-wing Democrats and fewer right-wing Republicans. But that is not what has happened in [...]
April 27, 2010
There’s a conceit among self-described “moderate” and “centrist” pundits that their politics are the only legitimate politics – and that those on the left and right are not as legitimate. When denunciation of the two “extremes” fails to arrest the collapse of the center, the moderates’ next move is to rig the system to [...]
April 27, 2010
Proposition 14 replaces our traditional party primary system with the “blanket” primary used by that paragon of political dysfunction, the state of Louisiana. Prop. 14 is the fruit of a corrupt bargain struck a year ago between liberal Republican state Sen. Abel Maldonado and legislative Democrats: Maldonado voted to enact the [...]
April 25, 2010
Prop 14, falsely dubbed an “open” primary, has found support among some prominent California newspapers. The Sacramento Bee says it will be a “win for democracy.” The San Francisco Chronicle says it will “create real competition.” The San Jose Mercury Says it will result in “a broader electorate choosing more results-oriented [...]
April 16, 2010
Proposition 14 is a political Trojan horse masquerading as electoral reform, that would reduce political voice and voter choice, while unfairly favoring incumbency and big money. At a time when California needs transformational change to address its multiple crises, Prop 14 would lurch the state backwards and institutionalize a deeply flawed election scheme in our constitution.
There should be no doubt that Prop 14 is a frontal attack on democracy. It is designed to stifle diversity and competition within the major parties, limit the choices of independent voters and drive minor parties off the ballot entirely.
April 13, 2010
FairVote’s Board of Directors recently voted to oppose Proposition 14 on the ballot this June in California. Here is our statement.
Many Californians are frustrated with their state’s politics. Incumbents almost never lose, most general elections are lopsided, and most elections are effectively decided in low-turnout primaries. The status quo is [...]
April 12, 2010
The official summary of Proposition 14 to appear on the California ballot was prepared by California Attorney General Jerry Brown, the proposition was sponsored by California Lieutenant Governor Able Maldonado and co-sponsored by two Democratic senators, Lou Correa of Santa Ana and Lois Wolk of Stockton; however, PFP Governor Candidate [...]
April 11, 2010
For more than three presidential cycles Ralph Nader has worked to open the political system to more voices and more choices for American voters.
That’s why it is particularly strange that Harry Kresky, in his commentary in favor of California adopting Proposition 14 for an open primary system, would claim that by opposing the [...]
April 5, 2010
Once political parties learn how to game the system, they can ensure that only one party appears on the November ballot…
April 4, 2010
Prop. 14 would, in fact, abrogate primaries and replace them with two general elections, causing the effective disappearance of all minor parties from the November election. No surprise, then, that an unholy alliance of the California Democratic and Republican parties, the Libertarian Party and the ACLU all forcefully oppose it.
April 2, 2010
Proponents of Proposition 14 claim that the “Top two primary” would relieve the partisanship and legislative dysfunction that characterize our political system. I could not disagree more. Rather than fixing the situation, Proposition 14 would permanently cement in place the appallingly broken two-party system that has been on full display in [...]
March 31, 2010
Top Two, as proposed in California, would radically restrict voters’ choices. Third party and independent candidates would be eliminated from the November ballot. In some places, voters might have only two Democrats on the ballot; in other places, only two Republicans. Top Two also exacerbates the problem of spoiler candidates and vote-splitting…
March 15, 2010
Big corporate money is pouring in to support Proposition 14. Blue Shield of California, Hewlett Packard, Shea Homes, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway, and Pacific Life Insurance Company are among the large corporate contributors. The list of contributors is located on the California Secretary of State website here. The California [...]
March 11, 2010
If top-two passes, the political discourse will suffer, because the period between June primaries and November elections, currently the most active time for public debate, will be purged of the independent…
February 19, 2010
Californians keep tinkering with the state’s elections system. That’s understandable given the low esteem in which Golden State politicians are…
January 24, 2010
Be aware Californians, on your June 8, 2010, direct primary ballot will be a very dangerous proposition which appears…
January 3, 2010
When someone tells you that we need a top-two open primary to get more moderate politicians in office, ask them for evidence…
December 31, 2009
On November 21, 2009, the Board of Directors of Californians for Electoral Reform (CfER) voted to oppose the so-called Top Two Candidates “Open Primary” Act that will be on the June 8, 2010 ballot. Our opposition is based on the conclusion that Top Two will limit voters’ choices, not expand them, and [...]
December 28, 2009
Oddly enough, the backers never seem to have looked at the experience of the two states that have actually used that system…
December 5, 2009
So, in practice, the “top-two open primary” does not shake things up. All it does it make it easier for incumbents to get re-elected…
November 21, 2005
Voters are advised to do their homework on the so-called “open primary” proposal sponsored by former…
February 15, 2004
The following report analyzes some of the electoral results and impacts of Louisiana’s nonpartisan primary. Its findings demonstrate that Louisiana’s system limits voter choices and can elect unrepresentative candidates…
Organizations
Californians
Nationwide
