Ten Oregon legislators are sponsoring HB 2580, which would legalize fusion and even provide that a voter could vote for the fusion candidate under either party label. The sponsors are these Republicans: Senator Brian Boquist and Representative Vicki Berger; and these Democrats: Senator Diane Rosenbaum and Representatives Peter Buckley, Chip Shields, Jeff Barker, Ben Cannon, Michael Dembrow, Chris Garrett, and Arnie Roblan.
If we are going to have a two-party system, then is probably a good idea. It encourages major and minor parties to form coalitions by giving them both something that they want.
Absolutley! Pass it!
I read the USSC case on this issue and its just simply horrible. The majority shamefully invokes the two-party system as some sort of compelling State interest.
Even if it were, that would seem to support allowing fusion because fusion, arguably, supports the two-party system.
Wouldn’t it be simpler to let all candidates file as independent candidates for the general election, and let parties endorse as many candidate(s) as they want, and then require a majority for election?
“Wouldn’t it be simpler to let all candidates file as independent candidates for the general election, and let parties endorse as many candidate(s) as they want, and then require a majority for election?”
Sorry, NO.
Yours is the simpleminded “good government” view of elections and parties.
The reality is that the current duopoly is the problem, but the “top two” system makes the duopoly into a more cohesive entity. It ends free elections. It constitutes n e o – c o m m u n i s m.
What we need is free elections, where every serious party or independent candidate is allowed on the GENERAL ELECTION Ballot.
Isolating serious independent and third party candidates on some primary ballot is just a ploy to end free elections. Only simpletons think it’s a good idea.
“I read the USSC case on this issue and its just simply horrible. The majority shamefully invokes the two-party system as some sort of compelling State interest.”
If the state is understood as the people who comprise it, then the two-party system is a compelling state interest. It may be against the public interest, but in a battle of state interest vs public interest, who are the courts going to decide for?
Fusion is another false reform, meant to give the appearance of expanding democracy, but actually just propping up the inbred two-party system. Oregon’s power brokers failed to get the top-two primary, so fusion is their next attempt to mollify the masses with superficial, useless ‘reform’.
Expect to see some minor-parties-for-sale, flush with Republicrat cash, enthusiastically support this window-dressing democracy.
Dear Oregon – if you really want to fix your elections, enact instant runoff voting for single-winner elections, and proportional representation for legislative elections. It’s that easy.
Good for you, Oregon. Pass it.
#5 What is the difference in what we are proposing?
My proposal. Joe Citizen decides he wants to be legislator (or any other office). He gathers enough signatures from his fellow citizens to indicate his seriousness. Political parties may endorse any candidate, subject to acceptance by the candidate. Election is held, and candidate with a majority is elected. If none, either hold a runoff, or hold another election.
Political parties would be free to encourage persons to run for office, or give additional support beyond their ballot endorsement.
What about making all candidates for all state and local offices nonpartisan? Put the emphasis on the individual candidate, not the party. I wouldn’t mind if registration by party were abolished.