The Independent Voters Network, which was created by proponents of the top-two system, has this article by me on how the California top-two system injures voter choice in November, and how it could be altered to restore voter choice in November without reducing voter choice in the primary.
USDC-DCD 15-Cv-1036-RJL Natural Born Citizen Party National Committee Et v FEC Et Al Docket Report as of July 30 2015
https://www.scribd.com/book/273064553
NO primaries.
Equal nominating petitions.
ONE election day.
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
I believe that the PR system is ideal and is something we should always be working toward. However, given the typically gradual nature of change, I think that Richard’s second proposal would be a great way to reform the primary system and maximize voters’ choice.
From what I can tell, its primary features are:
– a voluntary blanket primary
– the ability of parties to opt out and nominate at their own expense
But, can we append a name to this idea? How would it be pitched to voters? How can we summarize its features? Perhaps, “voluntary blanket primary”?
Also, is there any way to gauge how receptive parties would be to this reform? Can we anticipate how many parties would be likely to opt-in, especially in the context of California?
I have come to the conclusion there will never be any changes for a system which will be fair to all voters and all parties until the people unit and force the Establishment to make the changes.
Who is going to lead that revolt for us?
May I reprint your IVN article at Independent Political Report?
Sure!
Louisiana holds its statewide elections in October, with a runoff in November. California could accomplish much of what you seek by moving the primary to September.
Since California legislative terms begin in December, it is important to have the election over in November. If California moved the primary to September, then they could also permit a majority winner in the primary, just as they already do for most offices.
The Top-Two system establishes a false choice. Why two? Why not one? Or five…?
One may not have a majority.
Five might produce a non-majority in the next round. In some England States there were trials. Since there were no state-printed ballots, voters could write in any candidate of their choosing. If no candidate had a majority, they would hold another trial election. In some cases, there would be no one elected to Congress during the full two-year term.
Nebraska has used Top 2 for 70 years to elect its legislature.
What do you think are the merits of Top 5?