Lucille
10-12-2012, 05:44 PM
And idiot Arizonans will get the government they deserve, good and hard.
Strong Support for Open Primary in Arizona
http://ivn.us/openprimaries/2012/10/09/independent-survey-strong-support-for-open-primary-in-arizona/
With early balloting beginning on 11 October, a new independent poll finds the Arizona Top 2, Open Primary initiative likely to pass. No recent, independent polling data has been available apart from those supporting or opposing the initiative that would create a non-partisan top-two open primary.
The survey of 1,065 Arizona residents found 45% are inclined to vote for the open primary initiative and 31% against it, with 9% undecided and 15% not planning to vote. Looking only at likely voters, this gives the measure a 16 point advantage with 10% undecided.
On November 6th, Arizona voters will be deciding whether to change their election system. Under the current semi-closed primary system, partisan voters select Party candidates for the general election ballot. Since 2000, independents are permitted to vote in a party primary if, and only if, the parties allow them and only for one party. Open Elections – Open Government advocates for Proposition 121. Prop 121 would institute a Constitutional amendment, fundamentally changing the primary process in Arizona. All voters would vote on a single slate of candidates and the top two vote-getters would advance to the general election.
The proposed Arizona system is similar to the top two primary system adopted in Washington State and California and in use in Nebraska legislative elections since 1934. Local Arizona advocates for top-two are quick to point out that this is actually a 100 year old local system used to elect all town and municipal councils (save Tucson) and school board members. Proposition 121 merely extends this well-known system to county, legislative, state, and federal elections. Presidential primaries are exempted.
http://goldwaterinstitute.org/blog/will-arizonas-proposition-121-hurt-or-help-political-parties
Proponents of Prop. 121, the “top two” Arizona ballot initiative, contend it will lead to the weakening of the two major political parties. But the opposite is true. In fact, it would strengthen them while killing third parties, all to the detriment of voter choices.
Prop. 121 would create an open primary in which all candidates—Republicans, Democrats, independents, and third parties—would run. Only the top two would go on to the general election, and no other candidates would be permitted to appear on the ballot.
In California, this has led to multiple general elections featuring two candidates from the same political party. To Prop. 121’s backers, this is nirvana: the surviving candidates supposedly would have to appeal to independents and voters from the other party. To us, two candidates from the same party looks like no choice at all.
Nor would this necessarily produce two Republicans in Republican-leaning districts or vice-versa. To the contrary, the more candidates who run in a primary from the same political party, the more they will split their party’s vote—improving the chances that the other party’s candidates will move on to the general election.
This year in Congressional District 9, which has a slight Republican registration edge, there were fewer Democrats than Republicans running in the primary, so that under Prop. 121 the top two candidates moving to the general election would have been two liberal Democrats, Kyrsten Sinema and David Schapira, rather than Sinema and her Republican opponent, Vernon Parker. Which scenario offers a real choice? To ask that question is to answer it.
The only way to prevent a multiplicity of candidates from one party splitting the primary vote is to pressure candidates not to run; and the only entity that can do that is strong political parties. Thus Prop. 121 would lead to stronger political bosses and fewer electoral choices.
As for third parties, this measure’s impact is even clearer: it would make them extinct. Except in the rarest circumstances, neither Greens nor Libertarians—or even Independents—ever would appear on a general election ballot.
Though Prop. 121 calls itself the “Open Elections” initiative, it is anything but. Good thing for its backers there’s not a law requiring truth in political advertising.
Of course, our local statist rag thinks it's awesome.
http://azdailysun.com/news/opinion/editorial/open-primary-system-is-the-game-changer-arizona-sorely-needs/article_8ef65371-e8e3-5323-bd68-25d96068fa69.html
Strong Support for Open Primary in Arizona
http://ivn.us/openprimaries/2012/10/09/independent-survey-strong-support-for-open-primary-in-arizona/
With early balloting beginning on 11 October, a new independent poll finds the Arizona Top 2, Open Primary initiative likely to pass. No recent, independent polling data has been available apart from those supporting or opposing the initiative that would create a non-partisan top-two open primary.
The survey of 1,065 Arizona residents found 45% are inclined to vote for the open primary initiative and 31% against it, with 9% undecided and 15% not planning to vote. Looking only at likely voters, this gives the measure a 16 point advantage with 10% undecided.
On November 6th, Arizona voters will be deciding whether to change their election system. Under the current semi-closed primary system, partisan voters select Party candidates for the general election ballot. Since 2000, independents are permitted to vote in a party primary if, and only if, the parties allow them and only for one party. Open Elections – Open Government advocates for Proposition 121. Prop 121 would institute a Constitutional amendment, fundamentally changing the primary process in Arizona. All voters would vote on a single slate of candidates and the top two vote-getters would advance to the general election.
The proposed Arizona system is similar to the top two primary system adopted in Washington State and California and in use in Nebraska legislative elections since 1934. Local Arizona advocates for top-two are quick to point out that this is actually a 100 year old local system used to elect all town and municipal councils (save Tucson) and school board members. Proposition 121 merely extends this well-known system to county, legislative, state, and federal elections. Presidential primaries are exempted.
http://goldwaterinstitute.org/blog/will-arizonas-proposition-121-hurt-or-help-political-parties
Proponents of Prop. 121, the “top two” Arizona ballot initiative, contend it will lead to the weakening of the two major political parties. But the opposite is true. In fact, it would strengthen them while killing third parties, all to the detriment of voter choices.
Prop. 121 would create an open primary in which all candidates—Republicans, Democrats, independents, and third parties—would run. Only the top two would go on to the general election, and no other candidates would be permitted to appear on the ballot.
In California, this has led to multiple general elections featuring two candidates from the same political party. To Prop. 121’s backers, this is nirvana: the surviving candidates supposedly would have to appeal to independents and voters from the other party. To us, two candidates from the same party looks like no choice at all.
Nor would this necessarily produce two Republicans in Republican-leaning districts or vice-versa. To the contrary, the more candidates who run in a primary from the same political party, the more they will split their party’s vote—improving the chances that the other party’s candidates will move on to the general election.
This year in Congressional District 9, which has a slight Republican registration edge, there were fewer Democrats than Republicans running in the primary, so that under Prop. 121 the top two candidates moving to the general election would have been two liberal Democrats, Kyrsten Sinema and David Schapira, rather than Sinema and her Republican opponent, Vernon Parker. Which scenario offers a real choice? To ask that question is to answer it.
The only way to prevent a multiplicity of candidates from one party splitting the primary vote is to pressure candidates not to run; and the only entity that can do that is strong political parties. Thus Prop. 121 would lead to stronger political bosses and fewer electoral choices.
As for third parties, this measure’s impact is even clearer: it would make them extinct. Except in the rarest circumstances, neither Greens nor Libertarians—or even Independents—ever would appear on a general election ballot.
Though Prop. 121 calls itself the “Open Elections” initiative, it is anything but. Good thing for its backers there’s not a law requiring truth in political advertising.
Of course, our local statist rag thinks it's awesome.
http://azdailysun.com/news/opinion/editorial/open-primary-system-is-the-game-changer-arizona-sorely-needs/article_8ef65371-e8e3-5323-bd68-25d96068fa69.html