On April 8, California held a special election to fill the vacant U.S. House seat, 12th district. California uses blanket primaries in special elections. The two Democrats combined got 83.20%. The two Republicans combined got 14.44%. The Green got 2.36%. Since Democrat Jackie Speier polled over 50%, she is elected with no need for a run-off between the top vote-getter from each of the three parties that participated.
In November 2006, the vote in the 12th district had been Democratic 76.05%, Republican 23.95%.
Isn’t California’s blanket primary arrangement for elections to fill vacancies essentially the same as Prop. 198, ruled unconstitutional for general elections in California Democratic Party vs. Jones? What am I missing here?
Blanket primaries are only unconstitutional if a political party objects. No political party in California has ever objected to blanket primaries in special elections.
Mike Moloney, running as an antiwar Republican, came in third with over 4,000 votes, 5.4%. In past elections Mr Moloney has run as a Libertarian.
In this campaign, he has called for impeaching Bush and bringing the troops home.
The California blanket primary was for purposes of nominating candidates for a general election. California law said basically that (the voters of) each party could nominate one candidate; but it then let non-members, including members of other parties join in the voting.
The special election was to determine who was elected to Congress. A political party certainly has no right to object to any qualified person seeking election, or to restrict any qualified voter from the free exercise of his choice for representative. This of course does not diminish the 1st Amendment right of political parties to exhort their lemming-like followers to vote for a particular candidate.