If It’s Open, Will They Come?

By Jack Isselmann, principal, Vista Strategies

Low primary election turnout bolsters open primary proponents
Imagine throwing a party for ten of your closest friends. You invite them several weeks ahead of time, send them a pamphlet awash in information about the location, time, festivities, food, drink, attire, etc. You even make it easy for them to RSVP with a prepared return envelope. Yet, when the day comes, only four of your ten friends even bother to make an appearance. This is essentially what happened to the State of Oregon Elections Division on May 16. They threw a primary election and of more than 2 million registered voters, only 800,000 actually cast ballots.

The confounding nature of the low turnout is exacerbated by the fact that it is relatively easy to vote here. Oregon is the only state in the country that has done away with polling places and has an entirely vote-by-mail election system. This means that in Oregon our “Election Day” is actually two weeks long. This also means that the excuses for not voting must also stretch over more than 14 days.

However, the lack of voter interest in last month’s primary election has energized supporters of an open primary ballot initiative who hope to put the matter to voters in November. Supporters say Oregon has done all it can to make it easy to register as a voter and cast a ballot. The reason people still aren’t voting, the argument goes, is that party-controlled primary elections are weakening overall turnout in these important early contests.

Number of independents in Oregon increasing
In fact, the number of registered independent voters in Oregon has increased to 500,000 and independent voters now represent a full 25 percent of all who are registered in the state. Today, these voters cannot participate in primary races for governor, state senator, state representative and a number of other statewide offices. Under the open primary, as proposed, all voters—those registered with a political party or as an independent—would get the same state ballot. The top two vote getters in each race would advance regardless of party affiliation. This could produce a result where a Republican faces a Republican in the general election, or a Democrat versus Democrat, or an Independent goes against a Republican or any other number of possible combinations.

Supporters say...
Supporters maintain that by opening primary election voting to all voters, candidates will be more willing—and, in fact, find it necessary—to address Oregon’s most pressing issues in their campaigns. In turn, this would reduce or eliminate campaigning on so-called “fringe” issues that appeal only to the far right or the far left of a political party’s base. Supporters extend this argument to assert that campaigns focused on key issues will attract more qualified and moderate candidates to seek elective office while also energizing the electorate and increasing voter turnout.

Opponents counter…
Opponents to open primaries counter that political parties perform an important function in recruiting candidates and presenting them for elective office. Party leaders say that in an increasingly crowded media environment, even the best-financed candidates cannot communicate a message on all issues that affect voters. Affiliation with a political party helps provide voters with some sense of where a given candidate will stand on a particular issue, even issues that may not be addressed by a particular candidate in a given campaign cycle. Moreover, the political parties contend that party affiliations and closed primaries help produce general elections with stronger candidates. The 1991 gubernatorial race in Louisiana is frequently cited as an example of this contention. There, in an open primary system, voters were forced to choose between a former KKK leader, David Duke, and a former governor long dogged by charges of corruption, Edwin Edwards. Edwards won the election but is currently serving a 10-year prison sentence on a racketeering conviction. In large part this one example from Louisiana helped opponents to an open primary measure in California defeat it in November 2004.

Key races decided in the primary
Outside of the debate on the merits or threats of an open primary, what is increasingly clear is that key races are decided in the primary election or before. For example, 11 members of the 60 member Oregon House of Representatives have no general election opponent in November. In the Oregon Senate, primary voters have virtually ensured the election of three new senators to the 30-member Senate. Each of these has either no opposition or token opposition in the general election.

Tell us what you think!
The SAO wants to know what you think. Are open primaries a good idea? Would they bring us better candidates, better debates and more voter participation? Or would they undermine the role of political parties in our system and leave our elections vulnerable to run-offs between candidates that are the “lesser of two evils”? Please click here to complete this quick survey and look for the results at www.sao.org. Thanks!

About the author
Jack Isselmann, principal of Vista Strategies, brings a unique combination of governmental and business experiences to his client representation. Through 2004, Jack served as the Deputy Director for the Oregon Economic and Community Development Department (OECDD). He joined the agency after serving as the Governor’s appointed chair of the Economic and Community Development Commission and on Governor-elect Kulongoski’s transition steering committee. Prior to joining OECDD, Jack was general counsel and corporate secretary for Electro Scientific Industries, senior attorney at Intel Corporation, and was an attorney for the Portland-based law firm Stoel Rives LLP. More information is available at www.govtcounsel.com. Send e-mail to jack@sao.com.