Former California legislator Steve Peace has this article at Independent Voter News, saying it is time for California to abandon the top-two system created in 2010, and switch to a top-four or a top-five system with Ranked Choice Voting.
Peace was one of the leading actors in the creation of the top-two system in California, which was put on the ballot by the legislature after then-Senator Abel Maldonado, a Republican, said he would vote for the state budget if the legislature put top-two on the ballot. Maldonado, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Peace all worked together. At the time the California constitution required the state budget to pass with a two-thirds vote in each house. Republicans wouldn’t vote for the budget, and the stalemate, lasting over a month, created havoc.
Peace’s new article shows how top-two in California has motivated dirty tricks. Major party candidates sometimes run phony ads that ostensibly are for the purpose of boosting another candidate in the same race who is of the opposite major party. The motive is to manipulate the system so that the true sponsor of the ads can defeat his or her chief rival from the same party.
TOP 2 = MATH MORONS [CLUELESS ABOUT 3 PLUS CHOICES MATH] WITH NO SURPRISE MORON RESULTS
— [ESP N-O-T HAVING 1 D AND 1 R AS THE TOP 2 — HIGH PCT OF NON-VOTES]
—
NOOOOO PRIMARIES
ONE ELECTION DAY
EQUAL NOM PETS/FILING FEES
PR
APPV
TOTSOP
—
LATER CONDORCET WITH APPV TIEBREAKER
https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/05/politics/road-to-270-electoral-votes-2024/index.html
CNN 270 EC MACHINATIONS
USA – ON F-A-T-A-L MONARCH-TYRANT DOWNHILL SLIDE TO HELL ???
STARTED 4 JULY 1776 ??? DUH.
I don’t know if you meant to leave a link.
https://ivn.us/posts/author-californias-top-two-primary-says-its-time-reform-reform
(1) The primary should be moved to September.
(2) It should be possible to be elected by a majority in the primary just as it is for non-partisan offices.
(2a) For Congress, Top 2 should advance until Congress changes its statute.
(3) The primary should be Top N, where N is dynamic based on the strength of the candidates.
(4) Filing fees should be eliminated. Ballot access by personal appearance at county offices.
(4a) Candidate fields limited to 9.
(5) Party recognition threshold should be some small number like (50 or 100), but with write-in eliminated from registration form.
(5a) Recognition would come in the form of a petition by voters indicating they want to change their affiliation to a new party.
(5b) Parties would run their own internal elections (republican form of governance), either by mail ballot or convention. The State of California might provide assistance in the form of mailing out and collecting ballots. Parties may contract with counties to count the ballots.
(6) Presidential elections run using same system. If parties want a Spring Presidential Preference primary, they pay for it.
(7) Adopt some form of John Cox Citizen Legislature.
(7a) Alternatively expand Assembly based on Cube Root Rule with either proportional election or weighted voting.
There is a link.
Abandon Top Two Primary and go back to the way elections used to be held in California which each recognized party got its own primary and the winners of those primaries got guaranteed access to the general election ballot, and when all independent candidates could petition their way onto general election ballots.
Top 4 or Top 5 won’t stop the “dirty-tricks” that he mentions. The state has to give the parties control over who may run on their labels.
The quickest fix would be for the state to amend the law requiring that no candidate may run with a party label in the primary without the express permission of the party. That permission would be determined according to the internal rules of the party, and could include a simple OK from the state committee, a state convention, or an internal primary.
All candidates who have the necessary petition signatures would run in the primary, but only those with express party permission could have their party label listed.
@WZ,
The party preference of a candidate is his personal preference as he avowed to on his registration. If it is false, he could be prosecuted for perjury. Perhaps parties could restrict registration in their party.
Political parties in California can have their endorsement printed in the voter’s guide which is distributed to every voter before the election.
HOW ABOUT NOOOOO PARTY STUFF ON BALLOTS ???
LEGIS CANDIDATES CAN PICK SOME ADJECTIVE ONLY — NOT ADJECTIVE *PARTY*.
ANY COPYRIGHTS ON ADJECTIVES ???
AS USUAL — HUMAN CANDIDATES ARE ELECTED– NOT INVISABLE *PARTIES*.
Max Plan would solve all of this.
Walter, howsabout if their were to be no legal recognition of parties whatsoever? Simply not putting the party label on the ballot would eliminate all the fighting about who should or shouldn’t be able to use the label. Candidates and parties should communicate, or fail to communicate, partisan identification without the assistance of the state.
Steve is right!