Don't count on any quick fix to California's partisan political wars.
This June, California voters will have a chance to approve what appears to be a major reform of the primary process – an initiative aimed at electing more moderate candidates from both political parties.
Proponents contend that the measure could also help end Sacramento gridlock, which now appears to be a permanent dynamic of the political landscape.
As part of the budget deal in Sacramento earlier this year, the Legislature placed an initiative on the ballot which will allow voters in all state, U.S. House and and U.S. Senate primaries to cast their vote for any candidate, regardless of what political party they belong to. The two top vote-getters, even if they are from the same party, would go on to the general election.
The initiative now even has a number (as of last week): Proposition 14.
What impact could it have?
Here's the tantalizing vision that Santa Cruz County Treasurer Fred Keeley and former state Controller Steve Westly conjured up in a Feb. 9 op-ed piece in the LA Times: "Imagine a Legislature in which members can debate polarizing issues with open dialogue and civility, and at the end of the debate actually forge a compromise on the most difficult issues we face."
But a report by the Public Policy Institute of California showers a lot of cold water on the idea – at least for anyone thinking that the end result will be to turn Sacramento into a latter-day Athens.
The report comes to this depressing conclusion: The two-top-vote-getter system "would be just as likely as the current system to maintain the status quo."
The reports goes on to say that the initiative's "overall effect on California's political landscape would probably be modest."
As California teeters on the edge of yet another budget hole, something dramatic is needed. If the PPIC analysis is correct, open primaries ain't it.
Comments
via Twitter