Idaho Bill for a Top-Two System

Idaho State Senator Grant Burgoyne (D-Boise) has introduced SB 1001, which would set up a top-two system for all partisan office. The bill even appears to extend to presidential elections. If such a bill had been in effect in 2016, Ted Cruz would have been one of the names on the November ballot for president, because he won the Republican Idaho presidential primary.


Comments

Idaho Bill for a Top-Two System — 7 Comments

  1. Ted Cruz would likely run as an independent because he probably would have to and would prevent Trump from hitting 270 votes to win. And I would laugh.

  2. It also would ensure that the Democrats wouldn’t even be on the ballot in most statewide races.

  3. I think you are misreading the bill (which is poorly written). Since it is proposed by a Democrat, it won’t be passed by the legislature, but Idaho has a fairly reasonable initiative process.

    34-302 currently defines two types of elections: (1) primary election; and (2) presidential primary. Just because “primary” is part of “presidential election” does not make it a type of “primary election”.

    The bill adds subsections (3), (4), and (5) which refined the definition of (1). They would be better if they were added as (1.b), (1.c), and (1.d) with portions of the current (1) broken out as (1.a).

    The bill probably violates equal protection since it maintains the current qualification standards for partisan and independent candidates. Partisan candidates may pay a fee, or submit an in lieu of petition; while independent candidates must file a petition. While the numbers are not excessive (the fee for legislature is $30, or 50 signatures), there is no reason to not give independent candidates a choice.

    The bill would permit party bosses to replace a general election candidate (but not if both are from the same party). This would form a basis for a legal challenge, since it makes it seem as if such candidates are party nominees, and not candidates expressing personal party preference.

    A better solution would be to move the primary from May to September, and permit election in the primary (for Congress this would be suspended until when the federal law is changed). There is no reason to permit withdrawal from an election.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.