‘Top-two’ primary no guarantee of moderation - Board Member of Election Law Journal and Editor of ballot-access.org Richard Winger
California voters will see a ballot measure in June 2010 called the “top-two open primary.” All candidates for Congress and state office would run on a single ballot in June, and all voters would get that same ballot. Then, in November, only the top two vote-getters would be on the ballot.
People on both sides often say that system would result in more moderate elected officials. Setting aside the issue of whether we want an election system that mostly elects middle-of-the-road politicians, let’s look at the record. Is it true that a top-two open primary inevitably elects more moderates?
California experience: California has never used a top-two open primary system, but California did use something similar in 1998 and 2000, called the blanket primary. It provided that all candidates from all parties appear on the same primary ballot, and all voters use that same ballot. Then, the top vote-getter from each party appeared on the November ballot.
After the 2000 election, all 40 state senators and all 80 Assembly members had been elected under that blanket primary. What happened? We still had a legislature that was overwhelmingly partisan and polarized, according to a scholarly article written by professor Seth Masket in 2007.
His article, using a statistical analysis and published in the “American Journal of Political Science,” Volume 51, Number 3, shows that the California Legislature that sat during 2001 and 2002 was not composed of a higher proportion of moderates than either previous or later legislative sessions.
California stopped using the blanket primary after 2000, but California continues to use it for special elections for partisan office. Since 2001, eight new state legislators have been elected in special elections, and they are just as partisan as the legislators elected for the first time in regular elections.
Louisiana experience: The top-two open primary has been used for state office ever since 1975. In gubernatorial elections, it has frequently resulted in extreme candidates placing first or second.
In 1991, the two candidates who placed first and second for governor, and who thus qualified for the final round, were KKK leader David Duke and former Louisiana Gov. Edwin Edwards, who may have been moderate but later went to prison for corruption.
In 1995, the two gubernatorial candidates who placed first and second were Mike Foster and Cleo Fields. Foster was a conservative Republican whose main platform plank was to stop legalized abortion. Fields was a 32-year-old black state legislator who had supported Jesse Jackson for president in 1988. Both were talented and honest politicians, but neither was a moderate.
In 1999, the two gubernatorial candidates who placed first and second were Foster and William Jefferson, again a result that shows that top-two open primary doesn’t necessarily elevate moderates.
Washington State experience: In 2008, Washington used the top-two open primary for the first time. For governor, the top-two open primary produced a race between incumbent Christine Gregoire, a liberal Democrat, and Dino Rossi, a conservative Republican. An article in the Sept. 10, 2008, Seattle Times is headlined, “Gregoire, Rossi Far Apart on Social Issues.”
They disagreed on teaching creationism in the public schools, on the minimum wage, on domestic partner laws, and on whether pharmacies should be required to sell the morning-after pill. Both were capable and honest politicians, but neither was a moderate.
When someone tells you that we need a top-two open primary to get more moderate politicians in office, ask them for evidence. Don’t forget, registered independents in California can already vote in any Democratic or Republican primary for state office and Congress.
This article originally appeared in the Los Angeles Daily News under the title “Richard Winger: ‘Top-two’ open primary is no guarantee of moderation”. Richard Winger is the editor of Ballot Access News (www.ballot-access.org), a 25-year-old print publication, and on the editorial board of the Election Law Journal.
