Congressional Bill to Require States to Let Independent Voters Vote in Partisan Primaries

Posted on by August 14, 2024

Earlier this month, Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) introduced the “Let America Vote Act”, HR 9144.  It says states must let independent voters vote in presidential and congressional primaries.  It also says that states that don’t let independent voters vote in primaries for “state and local office” cannot receive federal funding for election administration.

The bill does not define “state or local office”, which leaves an ambiguity as to whether the bill applies to elections for party office.  The bill does not say that it applies only to public office.  About half the states hold publicly-administered elections for party office.

Here is the text. Fitzpatrick was elected to the U.S. House in 2016, and represents a district composed of Philadelphia suburbs.

Comments

Congressional Bill to Require States to Let Independent Voters Vote in Partisan Primaries — 34 Comments

  2. Whether or not to allow independents vote in a partisan primary should be up to the party itself. But, a state reserves the power not to pay for a closed primary.

  3. NOOO PARTY HACK PRIMARIES FOR PUBLIC OFFICES

    ONE ELECTION DAY

    EQUAL NOM PETS/FILING FEES FOR CAND BALLOT ACCESS

    PR/APPV

  4. It should be up to parties, and no level of government should have anything to do with funding or administering a party nomination or other internal party process.

  6. Parties should also have the option of running without candidates and only nominating officeholders if and when they win.

  7. Smart proposal. Target the funding that paid states to eliminate the democratic procedures (closed primaries) and turned those states into minority rule (where the results of closed primaries determine who holds 100% of the power).

  20. What do courts say on whether a party primary is or is not a type of election?

    I don’t think it is. Partisan primaries are for ballot access with partisan labels only (i.e. sore loser laws are illogical, and so are bans on write-in voting).

  21. Meanwhile, California’s top-two primary might be an election because it’s very similar to a normal election with a runoff.

  22. The bill is intrusive to the rights of political parties to govern themselves.

  23. If you want to vote in a primary, at least put in the effort to (re-)register with that party in order to do so.

    In any event, this should not be up to the federal government to legislate over the heads of state government.

  24. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/313/299/

    U.S. V CLASSIC

    SCOTUS RE STATE PRIMARIES — 1941 — MERE 83 YEARS AGO — ABOUT 8 MONTHS BEFORE USA IS DIRECTLY IN WW II.

    PARTY GANGS ARE N-O-T INDEPENDENT EMPIRES

    FACTIONS OF PUBLIC VOTERS [AKA PARTIES] DOING NOMINATIONS OF CANDIDATES FOR PUBLIC OFFICES VIA PUBLIC L-A-W-S

    AS 1 AMDT PRIVATE GANGS, PARTY FACTIONS CAN ENDORSE WHOMEVER.

  29. Thank you AZ for the court case reference.

    If parties are truly public factions, then if independents should be guaranteed the ability to vote in a party primary, there is no point to party registration. Isn’t that already the case in some states?

    I wouls think it also means there is no “official” party leadership, and no trademarking of generic party names and symbols.

  30. A.C. —

    NOOOO PRIMARIES

    ONE ELECTION DAY

    EQUAL NOM PETS/FILING FEES FOR BALLOT ACCESS

    PR LEGIS — VIA PRE-ELECTION CAND RANK ORDER LISTS OF OTHER CANDS —

    TOTAL VOTES / TOTAL MEMBERS = RATIO – EQUAL VOTES TO ELECT EACH MEMBER

    SURPLUS VOTES DOWN / LOWEST LOSER VOTES UP / A-L-L VOTES COUNT

    APPV – NONPARTISAN EXECS/JUDICS

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.