A California proposition passed Tuesday by a wide margin. You didn’t hear of it? That’s because it got no coverage outside the Golden State.
But it’s potentially the most important outcome of the Tuesday elections that were held in about a dozen states.
The proposition was known as the “Top Two” measure, and it eliminates the party primary system in favor of elections where anyone can run. Let’s take a hypothetical governor’s race. Say 15 candidates run. If one of them gets 50 percent plus one, he/she’s the winner. If no one gets 50 percent plus one, the TOP TWO finishers have a runoff.
The Republican and Democratic parties, naturally, are furious at the overwhelming outcome of the proposition election, and vow to fight it in court. Get that? The political parties vow to fight the will of the people in court. That’s how arrogant and out of touch they’ve become.
Proponents of the measure included Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who wants to take this “Top Two” campaign across the country. He believes it will strengthen the chances of moderates and candidates who don’t appeal to the out of touch leftwing and rightwing bases of the major parties.
I’d like to see such a thing in Illinois. However, we don’t have the ability to do what Californians can do, because the politicians won’t allow us to have propositions and wouldn’t put them in the 1970 constitution.
Related posts:
On the contrary, Chuck. The duopoly should be thrilled at this proposition passing, as it all but guarantees that the top two candidates will be one Democrat and one Republican. It effectively shuts out independents, third parties, write-ins, that’s why the Libertarians, Greens, Constitution Party and others came out against this measure. I can’t imagine any reason the duopoly would be fighting this.
Also must disagree on propositions – in this instance, Illinois politicians were wise not to put them in the constitution. Then you legitimize any nutjob idea that manages to get a requisite number of petition signatures, such as the anti-gay marriage crazies and the anti-tax nuts. A lot of the reason California is in the mess it’s in is due to the fact that property tax rates have been effectively frozen for 30 years as a result of a voter-approved constitutional amendment. No thank you, Chuck. Illinois is in enough trouble as it is.
Add one more thing for the Illinois version ” None of the Above ” and if None of the Above carries the vote New candidates would be called for.
Give the people a choice other than the lessor of two or more evils.
Yes, it’s going to benefit the DemocratRepublican duopoly. Maybe that’s why they’re FIGHTING IT IN COURT.
Right, Chuck, so I’ll eat my words when a Green faces off against a Libertarian or either of the duopoly, Mark my words, they’re complaining for show. Top two ensures that Democrats and Republicans will be the only ones winning elections in California.
Chuck,
Sorry I came across this one a little late. Please let me change your mind about a Prop. 14 style Top Two election system. I was politically involved in Illinois where I grew up and lived and volunteered for Christina Tobin’s StopTopTwo.org opposed to Prop. 14 Top Two. You know Jim Tobin in IL. Christina moved from IL to CA and is running for CA Sec. of State as a Libertarian.
First I must correct you on this sentence, “If one of them gets 50 percent plus one, he/she’s the winner. If no one gets 50 percent plus one, the TOP TWO finishers have a runoff.”
Under Prop. 14 Top Two in CA, this is not true. A candidate can be alone on the June ballot and get 100% of the June vote and they still have to be on the ballot for the election in November. June is the first round of voting, but no one can be elected even if they get more than 50%. Why? The US Constitution says elections for Congress are in November. It would be unconstitutional to have an election in June that could pick a US Senator or US Representative, so you have to have a November run-off no matter what.
If you notice in Louisiana they are going back to a top two run-off but the first round is in November and the run-off is in December.
The Reps and Dems don’t hate this as much as you think they do. Its a compromise for them, because it does get rid of pesky independents and alternative parties like the Greens, so the Reps and Dems like that part of it. They don’t like that it will cost them more work and more money to protect their brands.
Here is more evidence that they don’t hate it. $5 million vote yes versus $300,000 vote no. They didn’t spend much money opposing it. The Green and Peace and Freedom parties ran TV commercials but the Reps and Dems did not, they only ran radio, along with the Libertarians. The Vote NO spent a TOTAL of $300,000, mostly from a couple teacher and labor groups and some from the Reps, and the rest from the independents and third parties.
The Vote YES side spent about $5 million and just told Bloomberg’s Businessweek they were prepared to spend $15 million. Arnold gave $2 million, and NetFlix CEO gave big and Chamber business interest types. It is just as important to know who loved it as who hated it. Special interests who can throw money at crowded field to elect both of their “moderate” gals/guys to be in the top two loved Prop. 14.
The people that hated Prop. 14 the most was Christina Tobin and the coalition of independents and alternative parties she put together. StopTopTwo.org had the best internet outreach and media campaign going. The people that voted in the polls on election day voted against Prop. 14, it only one because about half of the vote was from mail-in ballots prior to election day. And the special interests, with AARP’s help, had the money to buy the early vote before the truth came out about Prop. 14 limiting voter choice. The polls showed Prop. 14 passing with 60%, and the mail-in vote reflected that. but it only passed with less than 53.8%.
Now, imagine Pat Quinn versus Dan Hynes for Governor right now, because that is what you would have under Top Two. Or, more likely, party bosses and special interests would have tried to weed out the Republican candidates for Governor to give the Republican party a better chance at having one candidate on the November ballot. Instead of the voters deciding from those Republicans running for Governor, the party bosses and special interests would have picked. Voters lose.
How do we know that is what would have happened with that many Republicans running for Governor in Illinois? The Chair of the Democratic Party in Washington State, where they have Top Two, recently admitted to the Sacramento Bee that when multiple candidates from his party want to run for an office he has to talk some of them out of running and he said there is more backroom politics behind which candidates run.
In Illinois, for statewide offices, go ahead and have a free for all first round of voting, but take the top 4 or 5 to the final round of voting and let the voters use instant runoff voting to pick the best one. In district offices for the GA, Illinois needs to go back to multi-member districts. Use larger 5 member districts and then use the system Peoria, IL uses to elect their 5 at-large council members. Free for all first round with top two going to final round and voters get 5 bullet votes. That would really shake up the Dems and Reps because independents and Greens and such could and would win some seats away from them. They would really hate that.
Don’t look to the fools in California for solutions, look at whats playing in Peoria right now.
Correction for myself. In Peoria the top ten, not two, go on to the final election with voters getting 5 bullet votes and 5 candidates elected at large.
And get rid of gerrymandered districts while we’re at it.