Initiative in California Would Change How It Votes

California - In another indication of how frustrated voters have grown with politics as usual, California — home of initiative-happy democracy — is considering a radical overhaul.

On June 8, voters will decide the fate of a ballot measure that would replace traditional primaries in state and Congressional elections with, effectively, two rounds of voting. All candidates would run in the first round, and the top two vote-getters — regardless of party affiliation, or unaffiliation — would then face each other in the general election. Voters’ ultimate choice could be two Republicans or two Democrats, or two candidates with high name recognition, or deep pockets, or populist appeal.

Supporters, including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Lt. Gov. Abel Maldonado, both Republicans, have been promoting the measure — Proposition 14 — as a kind of electoral panacea, saying it could encourage political moderates and increase turnout in primaries where hard-line candidates often win. And in a state saddled with a $19 billion deficit, high unemployment and low morale, the promise of new blood in Sacramento seems to be a potent one; the latest polls show the measure favored by a majority of voters, and support growing.

“I think people are disappointed in their government,” Mr. Maldonado said. “And that’s why they are supporting this.”

But political parties hate the idea.

“There is zero evidence to suggest the initiative would have the results its proponents claim,” said Ron Nehring, the chairman of the California Republican Party. “We firmly believe that initiative will limit choice.”

Proposition 14 has already performed a miracle, unifying the Democratic and Republican Parties in this polarized state capital. Both have joined a catch-all opposition that includes the state’s Green Party, its Libertarians, the American Independent Party, the socialist Peace and Freedom Party, members of the “birther” movement, and Cindy Sheehan, the liberal antiwar activist.

Small parties, in particular, are unhappy with the proposition, saying it would box them out of general elections, which they say would most likely be populated by better-known and better-financed candidates.

“It’s the biggest threat to independent and third parties in the last 50 years,” said Christina Tobin, who is running for secretary of state as a Libertarian while also campaigning against Proposition 14. “It would make it far more difficult for minor parties to qualify. ”

The truth, of course, is that neither side knows how Proposition 14 might play out; the system being proposed is based on one in Washington, a state with roughly a sixth of the population of California. It has been used only twice, in primaries.

Under the proposition, all candidates would be listed on a single primary ballot for Congressional and statewide elective offices, including governor, the Assembly and the State Senate. Candidates could list their party preference or no preference. Every voter would be allowed to cast a ballot in the primary, regardless of party, and the top two vote-getters — even if from the same party — would advance.

The Democratic-controlled Legislature agreed to put the proposition on the ballot last year as part of a deal with Mr. Maldonado, who pressed for a vote in exchange for crossing party lines on a budget deal, which closed a $41 billion deficit.

Such systems are not entirely new; California actually adopted a similar electoral method — a so-called blanket primary that allowed voting across party lines — in 1996. In 2000, it was invalidated by the United States Supreme Court after a challenge from several political parties. But the “top two” system in Washington State was affirmed by the same court in 2008.

Mark Baldassare, president and chief executive of the Public Policy Institute of California, a policy study and polling group, said Proposition 14 was just the latest ballot initiative to act as an electoral protest for California voters, including a 2009 measure that put conditions on raises for legislators and other state officials and a 2008 measure that took redistricting power away from elected officials.

“There’s a desire to find something that you can express your displeasure with the status quo,” said Mr. Baldassare, whose last poll, released May 19, found 60 percent approving of Proposition 14. “And this is probably the one this year that voters are focused on as a way to send a message.”

Regardless of the proposition’s intent, electoral experts say its impact is unclear. Paul Gronke, director of the Early Voting Information Center at Reed College, worked to defeat a similar ballot measure in Oregon in 2008.

“I felt like it was snake oil,” Mr. Gronke said. “It was like a little carny barker going around saying, ‘It’s going to cure everything.’ ”

And while supporters say it will increase the number of centrists, Mr. Gronke says it could actually encourage the election of more fringe candidates who manage to make it to the general election. He cited David Duke, the white supremacist, who forced a runoff for the governor’s seat in Louisiana in 1991 under that state’s electoral system. Louisiana law requires state and local candidates to gain a majority in primaries to win election.

“Extremists could do better in this system because they hold on to their voters very tightly,” Mr. Gronke said. “And you let the candidates in the vast middle area duke it out.”

For their part, Washington election officials say it is too early to make many generalizations about the effect of “top two,” other than that it is popular with voters. “It really fits into our tradition of ‘voting for the person, not the party,’ ” said David Ammons, a spokesman for Sam Reed, Washington’s secretary of state.

In California, the measure is being backed by an eclectic roster of businessmen and politicians, including Lewis Wolff, a real estate developer and the owner of the Oakland A’s baseball team; Steve Westly, a former Democratic candidate for governor; and John W. Thompson, chairman of Symantec and a supporter of President Obama.

Symantec, which makes computer security software, is just one of several Silicon Valley companies that have backed the measure; others include Hewlett Packard, which has put $100,000 into the campaign. Both HP and Mr. Thompson declined to comment on their donations.

Allan Zaremberg, president and chief executive of the California Chamber of Commerce, a pro-business group that is backing Proposition 14, said that the “top two” system was not geared toward electing any particular party but rather candidates who were “very concerned with jobs and the economy. ”

Of course, in a state with more Democratic legislators and members of Congress, a measure that some see as part of a wider national movement against incumbents could result in a more conservative political landscape in California.

John Burton, chairman of the California Democratic Party, said he feared nefarious intentions were behind the measure. “It allows one party to play in another party’s primary, ” he said, “and cause mischief. ”

Eric McGhee, a research fellow with the Public Policy Institute, said a study of open primary systems and California’s past experience with “blanket primaries” — the system the Supreme Court invalidated in 2000 — found that the type of sabotage Mr. Burton posited was not common and that voter turnout had shown a modest increase.

That said, Mr. McGhee said the notion of a silver bullet — however bad the voters of California want one — was also overstated.

“We should not expect this reform to quickly or dramatically change the state’s partisan climate,” he said.

NY Times