A bill is pending in Oklahoma to add a proposed constitutional amendment to the November 2026 ballot. It would say that every qualified political party is entitled to have a nominee on the general election ballot in all partisan elections. If HJR 1019 passes, and if the initiative for a top-two system has enough valid signatures, then there would be two competing measures on the November 2026 ballot, which would not be compatible with each other. Here is the text of HJR 1019. The bill has a hearing in the House Rules Committee on March 5. The chief sponsor is Representative Eric Roberts ($-Oklahoma City).
What party does Eric Roberts represent?
This is the ploy used be the Democrats in California to sabotage the initiative for an Open Primary.
It was a Republican legislator in California who authored Prop. 60 in the November 2004 election. Prop. 60 is very similar to this new Oklahoma bill. It passed. Prop. 62, the top-two ballot initiative in November 2004, lost.
@RW,
Proposition 60 (SCA 18) passed the Senate on a 28-3 vote. It had almost universal support by the uniparty.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_California_Proposition_62
“The California Constitution provides that if the provisions of two approved propositions are in conflict, only the provisions of the measure with the higher number of “yes” votes at the statewide election take effect. Since Prop 60 passed and Prop 62 did not, the issue was moot.”
A top two jungle primary scheme is not the same as a traditional open primary and referring to top two as an open primary with context to clarify the differences is one of the disingenuous tactics the supporters of SQ836 have engaged in here in Oklahoma.
My proposal for a legislative backstop should SQ836 qualify for the ballot was a competing measure that would have eliminated primaries altogether, but it looks like the guarantee of a nominee for each party on general election ballots was the preferred option by legislators. The fault of this will become apparent when two candidates of the same party are in the top two of a particular district and split the partisan majority in that district, allowing a candidate of a party with minority support in that district to win.
@CP,
I use the terminology from Louisiana.
It **is** disingenuous to call a system where a voter may choose their electoral prison “open”. The door of the jail is open, and after you enter you are locked in. “jungle primary” is pejorative. I wonder why political “scientists” use it?
Political science is to science as yellow snow is to snow.