Daily Kos has this article about the August 2, 2016 Washington state primary, and the Treasurer’s race. Three Democrats and two Republicans filed. Even though 52% of the electorate voted for one of the three Democrats, only two Republicans will be on the November ballot, because they came in first and second.
The Daily Kos story properly blames the top-two system for the result, which is that voters who want a Democrat to be Treasurer are disenfranchised in November. Washington state permits write-ins in the general election, and conceivably a Democrat could launch a write-in campaign. But the state won’t let any of the three Democrats who filed in the primary be write-in candidates. Thanks to Jan Tucker for the link.
NO moron primaries.
Ballot access ONLY via equal nominating petitions.
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
That’s great.
What impresses me is that defenders or those pointedly indifferent to the lesser of two evils dilemma can see a lack of justice in the top two format. How representation can be said to fairly exist under two evils but top two be suspect is for them to answer. Good to see top two called out as ugly by those with very conservative notions on passable represention.
Under IRV (instant runoff voting) in single-winner districts, only one party. The one that wins is always the biggest party/civic group, and with wins year after year creates a one-party rule.
Top Two allows random wins by those other than the biggest single party/civic group at least in the first stage of a two-stage election. So third parties and independents are guaranteed to get elected.
A third alternative is pure proportional representation (PR).
The USA Parliament has been using (PR) for more than 21 years and it works the best of all, lowering the threshold for winners from 33.33% to 1/1001ths (.001%).
http://www.usparliament.org
Now there’s the new International Parliament which also has a threshold for winners at 1/1001ths (.001%):
http://www.international-parliament.org
Nobody has it as good as the United Coalition!
The United Coalition
Under IRV (instant runoff voting) in single-winner districts, only one party wins year after year with 50% plus one vote. The one that wins, is always the biggest party/civic group, and by winning year after year this creates almost a one-party rule.
Top Two allows random wins by those other than the biggest single party/civic group at least in the first stage of a two-stage election, threshold for winning in first stage is 33.33% plus one vote. So third parties and independents are guaranteed to get elected, when they reach the lower threshold.
A third alternative is pure proportional representation (PR).
The USA Parliament has been using (PR) for more than 21 years and it works the best of all, lowering the threshold for winners from to 1/1001ths (.001%) for each of the 1000 names elected at-large on the national level.
http://www.usparliament.org
Now there’s the new International Parliament which also has a threshold for winners at 1/1001ths (.001%) on the international level:
http://www.international-parliament.org
Nobody has it as good as the United Coalition!
In Texas, the last 5 State Treasurers were:
Warren G Harding
Jesse James
Ann Richards “She must of done a good job, because you never hear about the office.”
Kay Bailey Hutchison “She must of done a good job, because you never hear about the office.”
Martha Whitehead, who was elected on a platform of abolishing the office.
The idea of State Treasurer is that you don’t want the governor controlling the state checkbook —
“Pay to the Order of Crony Construction, $XX,000,000 and 37/100.” If anything, you would want a constitution to mandate that a state treasurer was of the opposite party. But with 100s of workers, there is little chance of fraudulent bills getting paid.
If you look at the experience in the Washington Voters Guide, you will see that one candidate had basically NO qualifications (I voted on the budget of Muckluck when I was on the city council; and I’m still paying on student loans; indicates a general lack of relevant qualifications). If he had been seeking to be a corporate treasurer, his application would have been tossed by a clerk in the mail room.
This candidate had been a state representative for four years, when he announced he was going to be running for Congress, but he backed out after redistricting changed the district. Then later he was appointed state senator. He had initially been appointed as representative, and he filed for state treasurer on the last day of filing before the primary, with apparently no discussion before.
There were significant differences in levels of support for the Republican candidates among the statewide offices, ranging from 34% to 48%, suggesting that a lot of voters were looking at the actual individual candidates.
A regime Treasurer is a MAJOR office — to watch so that there is only LEGAL incomes and outgoes in the regime.
It is an office for ambitious politicians who then seek another office, based on name recognition.
California:
Jesse Unruh (died in office)
Kathleen Brown (ran for governor and lost)
Matt Fong (ran for governor and lost)
Phil Angelides (ran for governor and lost)
Bill Lockyer (term limited, after having been both Attorney General and Treasurer)
John Chiang (previously controller, and announce candidate for Governor in 2016)