http://www.kvpr.org/post/new-top-two-election-system-causes-problems-smaller-political-parties

New "Top Two" Election System Causes Problems For Smaller Political  
Parties

By Joe Moore
Editor's note: This is the second in a two-part series on the impact  
of California's new top-two election reform.

When California voters approved Proposition 14 in 2010, supporters  
hailed it as a way to make many races for Congress, the Legislature  
and state offices more competitive, thanks to a new top-two election  
system.

But now, with the first full election cycle under the new process  
complete, some are worried that this effort at reform could also lead  
to the demise of some of the state's smaller political parties, even  
possibly stripping them of their eligibility to appear on future  
primary ballots.

"This reform specifically hurts third parties," says Eric McGhee of  
the non-partisan Public Policy Institute of California. That's because  
the new system effectively makes it much harder to reach the  
thresholds needed to qualify for a political party for the ballot.

"The way that parties actually become qualified for the ballot in the  
first place, even to run in the primary, is based on their showing in  
previous elections," says McGhee.

And specifically previous general elections. The same  ones that under  
the reforms of Proposition 14, now only feature two candidates, the  
top-two vote-getters from the primary election.

"The opportunity for minor parties to do that [make the general  
election ballot] in the new top-two scheme is much more limited," says  
Kim Alexander of the non-profit California Voter Foundation.

In fact, in the November, election just three candidates from the so- 
called minor parties, and five no-party preference candidates made it  
to the general election ballot.

Part of the problem, according to Alexander involves the legislation  
that was needed to implement Prop 14, after it was approved by voters.

"Prop 14 was drafted pretty quickly. It's important to remember that  
it was a last minute bill that was put on the ballot in 2010, and it  
was not crafted that thoughtfully. And in fact, it required major  
cleanup legislation the following year to make it ready to actually be  
implemented," says Alexander.

So exactly how does a political party qualify, or remain qualified for  
the ballot? And what about those changes made by the Legislature that  
supposedly hurt third parties? We asked Keith Smith, professor of  
political science at the University of the Pacific in Stockton. It  
turns out there's actually three ways for a political party to qualify.

"The first one is that a party has to get two percent of the vote in a  
statewide constitutional office. For example, governor, lieutenant  
governor, insurance commissioner, one of the party's nominees has to  
get two percent of the final vote. For the minor parties, that option  
is basically gone," says Smith.

That's important because as Smith says, "the four minor parties that  
are there all got at least two percent of the vote for insurance  
commissioner in 2010."

The numbers are based on the vote in last gubernatorial election, in  
this case, 2010. So after the next election for governor, which will  
take place in 2014, it's highly unlikely that the state's smaller  
parties will qualify in this manner.

"The second way that they can be qualified is if they register  
partisans totaling one percent of the gubernatorial vote in the last  
election," says Smith. "And in looking at the 15-day registration  
statistics, the American Independent, the Libertarian and the Green  
Party now have one percent of the gubernatorial vote registered as  
members of their party. The Peace and Freedom Party does not. The  
Peace and Freedom party is about about 50,000 people away from having  
one percent of the gubernatorial vote in 2010."

That means if all else stays the same, after the 2014 election,  
according to Smith, "candidates won't be able to affiliate with the  
Peace and Freedom Party anymore because they won't be qualified." And  
if the other parties fail to maintain their voter registration  
numbers, they could fall off the ballot as well.

This provision also hurts third parties because in many cases, a lot  
of people, who in the past voted for a third party candidate in the  
general election, were actually registered with another party. For  
example, a Democrat voting for a Green Party candidate, or a  
Republican voting for a Libertarian.


"It's harder to get people to register in your party if you're never  
on the ballot," - Michael Feinstein, Green Party of California

And Michael Feinstein, spokesperson for the Green Party of California  
says the top two system makes the voter registration option even more  
difficult, because historically many voters tend to stay home for the  
primary, and only come out in big numbers for the general election.

"It's harder to get people to register in your party if you're never  
on the ballot," says Feinstein.

That leaves parties one last option to make it on the ballot, a very  
expensive one, petitions.

"The third way that you can be a qualified political party is if you  
gather petitions equaling ten percent of the gubernatorial vote," says  
Smith."And that's a higher threshold than getting a ballot initiative  
or a constitutional ballot initiative qualified. And this is how  
Americans Elect got on the ballot. They paid to have signature  
gatherers get ten percent of the registrant population to say 'yeah,  
we should have Americans Elect on the ballot.'"

So, the last option is very expensive, and the first option highly  
unlikely, leaving Libertarians and Greens only the voter registration  
option as a way of stay on the ballot and off the unqualified list,  
which is populated by such well known political voices as the  
California Pirate Party and the We Like Women Party.

But the challenges for third parties don't stop there. The Legislature  
also raised the fees and requirements for candidates themselves to get  
on the ballot. Smith says that in the November election that made some  
candidates stay away, and choose not to run.

"Even small changes in filing fees or signature requirements can  
significant drive down the number of third party candidates," says  
Smith.

Michael Feinstein of the Green Party says he thinks it's part of an  
effort by Democrats and Republicans to keep third parties off the  
ballot.

"It used to be that we needed 60 signatures for a state assembly race  
in lieu of paying a filing fee. Now we need 1,500. We used to need 150  
for governor, now we need 10,000. So on every level, this is designed  
to reduce voice and options for the California voter," says Feinstein.

The final major change as part of the top-two system removed one other  
option from the general election, write-in candidates. And that too  
doesn't go over well with Feinstein.

"When you think back to the state of Alaska a couple of years ago,  
when Lisa Murkowsky, the Republican incumbent lost the primary to a  
Tea Party faction candidate, and then she ran in the general election  
as a write-in [candidate] in the general and was elected. We no longer  
have that option [in California] and instead the system just renders a  
false majority," says Feinstein.

So what might the future hold for third parties in California and the  
new election reforms? Feinstein says he thinks that the courts will  
overturn Prop 14 and related laws for presenting what he calls  
"unconstitutionally high barriers to participation in the general  
election." And even supporters like Kim Alexander advocate making  
changes to reduce the effects  on California's smaller parties.

"I hope the legislature revisits the impact that the top-two primary  
system is having on minor parties in California. They are an important  
part of our electoral landscape," says Alexander. "There are a lot of  
Californians who feel that neither of the major parties represent  
their interests, and we don't want them to feel like there's no place  
for them to go. So we really need to have a system that enables third  
parties to have a presence in the California political process." 
  

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to