On April 6, Idaho HB 351 passed both houses of the legislature. It lets parties decide for themselves whether to let all voters vote in their primary, or just independents plus party members, or just party members. The bill also sets up a system whereby voters can register as a member of a party, either on voter registration forms or at the May 2012 primary voting location.
The vote in the House was 51-16; the vote in the Senate was 28-7.
I wonder what all was changed between SB 1198 which the senate had passed; and HB 351 which was introduced and passed in both houses in two days. Maybe they wanted to avoid a conference committee?
The only part I found where they switched the text on who had the authority to decide who voted in a primary. It appears they were trying to take the authority from the state chairman, but they kind of goobered the change – so it literally reads that the state party can determine whether unaffiliated voters participate in a primary, but the chairman can determine which other parties voters of are allowed to vote.
Ultimately it will just be a bunch of busywork which will serve to irritate voters.
The Democrats can open their primary to Republicans. So they could just tell anyone in a Republican-leaning area to register as a Republican and then choose which primary you want to vote in at each election. And it might not be that hard to vote in Republican primaries as a non-affiliated voter.
Non-affiliated voters can affiliate on election day. So the Republicans could insist on non-affiliated voters first affiliating. But if a non-affiliated voter walks in, can the election judges lay out all the options? Or do they just ask whether the voter would like a Democratic or non-partisan ballot?
And there are still two steps to absentee voting.
Good would be voluntary pick-a-party.
Better would be voluntary blanket.
Best would be Top 2 Open Primary.
It is plausible that a Moderate Party, or an Independence Party, will be formed in Idaho by people who are angry with the Republican Party and yet who don’t like the Democratic Party. But if Idaho had a top-two system, that would squelch the proposed new party.
Donkeys in ID = Elephants in MA
Very scarce in each. General elections are de facto meaningless in both de facto one party States.
P.R. and App.V.
#2 Why would a top-two system squelch the proposed new party? Have adherents of the Salmon Yoga Party and Coffee Party sought office in States other than those that have a Top 2 Open Primary>
Richard: Assuming that the governor signs HB 351, won’t it make the Republican Party’s case moot against the state-mandated open primary? Thus the intervenors won’t be able to pursue their appeal to the 9th circuit.
#5, I agree with you. The appeal would be moot.
Judge Winmill relied mainly on the defense evidence, particularly the report by Martin&Saunders that debunked the flawed evidence of Munger.
In particular, the judge excerpted the following quote:
“Inside the Idaho open primary system, especially in a one-party state like Idaho where the Republican Party primaries are in most cases the “only game in town,” voters do likely cross over;”
But he neglected the context, which was:
“they have to in order to have any meaningful influence in elections and express their sincere preferences with regard to their own representation, just as voters did in the one-party Democratic South a generation ago.”
That is, a closed primary will no more preserve orthodoxy in the Republican Party in Idaho, than it did in one-party Democratic South. In 2010, 3/4 of county commissioner counties were unopposed. Voters will register as Republican if they want to have any influence on who administers their county. When 90% of contested legislative primaries are on the Republican side, as they have been from 1992-2010, then they will register as Republican if the want to vote for their legislator.
Some studies have shown more negative strategic voting under closed partisan primaries than in open partisan primaries.
So if the Beck Republicans were concerned about cross-over voting, the new law will do little to address the issue.
And it interferes with the political association rights of other parties and voters and ballot secrecy to an unnecessary extent. It is not narrowly tailored.
#7: The Idaho Democrats have indicated that they will keep their primaries open to all voters.
So if the Idaho Republicans invite independents to vote in GOP primaries, independents will have their choice of either party’s primary.
#7 The independent voter would have to make a public disclosure of which ballot they wanted, and if they were voting absentee, this would be a two-step process.
If there were a voluntary pick-a-party primary, a voter would receive a ballot with candidates of all parties that would allow his participation and he could make his choice on the ballot.