Top-two primary might be bad for small-party candidates

Peace and Freedom Party candidate Cindy Sheehan, pictured in 2007, says the top-two system "seems designed to kill" smaller political parties. (Jerry Larson / Associated Press)

When California voters decided to change the way the state's primary elections work, the move was cast as an effort to moderate a state Capitol gripped by polarization.

If the top two vote-getters in a primary faced off against one another in November regardless of their party affiliation, the reasoning went, hard-nosed politicians who typically put party purity above all else would be forced to court less partisan voters. That could mean more centrists elected to office, more political compromise and better governance.

But with the approach of only the second election since the enactment of the "jungle" primary — the first featuring candidates for statewide office — some argue that the change has had a decidedly undemocratic effect, muzzling the voices of small-party candidates.

The Green Party, the American Independent Party and other minor groups will now rarely — if ever — appear on the general election ballot, even though they represent 1.2 million people. And they could eventually find themselves out of existence in California, the critics fear.

"It's just a violation of voting rights," said Richard Winger, a Libertarian and publisher of the San Francisco-based Ballot Access News. "Because the right to vote includes the right of the choice."

Antiwar and social justice activist Cindy Sheehan, running for governor as a member of the Peace and Freedom Party, paints a more dire picture. "It seems designed to kill our parties," Sheehan said.

Membership outside the Democratic and Republican parties and among those who state no party preference is admittedly a sliver of California's electorate. And every party has equal footing — at least theoretically — in the current primary system, which voters approved in 2010 for all races except presidential contests.

But already, far fewer third-party candidates have been able to qualify for the general election ballot.

In June 2012, with more than 150 races taking place under rules being applied for the first time, only three minor-party candidates made it to November. This year, no third-party candidate is likely to appear on the fall ballot for governor, attorney general or other high office.

It is more costly now for small parties to place a candidate on the ballot. Previously, Democratic or Republican candidates for statewide office had to pay a filing fee of $2,610 to $3,480 or gather the signatures of 10,000 registered voters to make the cut. But members of smaller parties were allotted a sharp discount and needed only as many as 150 signatures to avoid the fee.

This resulted in a plethora of candidates qualifying for the ballot. In 2010, 33 candidates representing smaller parties ran for statewide office, from the Green, Libertarian, Peace and Freedom, and American Independent parties. Because of closed party nominations, each party was guaranteed a spot on the November ballot.

This year, the filing fees are the same but there are no discounts for small parties. Now, there are only 10 candidates for statewide office from seven minor parties. And barring a major upheaval, none will proceed past the June primary because most Californians still vote for Democrats or Republicans.

"There's no question that the minor parties are disadvantaged by the top-two rule," said Richard Hasen, a law professor at UC Irvine who specializes in elections.

By contrast, candidates who do not register with a political party have benefited from the change. In the 2010 California primary, all candidates for statewide office had a party affiliation; this year, there are eight who state no party preference.

The occasional third-option candidate has won in California. The Green Party's Audie Bock won a state Assembly seat in a special election in 1999. Another Green Party member, Gayle McLaughlin, was elected mayor of Richmond in 2006.

In other states, Angus King won a U.S. Senate seat in Maine in 2012, and Lincoln Chafee won the Rhode Island gubernatorial contest in 2010, without party affiliations. Reform Party candidate Jesse Ventura won the Minnesota governorship in 1998.

Such candidates can shape campaigns even if they don't win, Hasen said, citing the effect of an unaffiliated Ross Perot on the 1992 presidential contest.

"His mantra was deficit reduction, and it became a major factor in the campaign," Hasen said. "In fact, it became something Bill Clinton adopted as one of his priorities. It never would have happened if not for Perot…. Losing minor parties does make the debate less rich."

Efforts are underway to offer relief to those groups.

The Green, Libertarian, and Peace and Freedom parties are pressing a lawsuit on appeal in state court alleging disenfranchisement and other harms, with a new argument filed April 3. And an Assembly bill that would reduce the level of support required for a minority-party candidate to be recognized by the state will be the subject of an upcoming hearing.

View the original article here

Massachusetts Primary Battles Heat Up

Two Democratic congressmen will square off in the April 30 primary; Republicans have a three-way race. The winners will face each other in a special election scheduled for June 25.

All five candidates submitted at least 10,000 signatures on Wednesday to earn a spot on their respective primary ballots. The signatures still have to be verified, but the field is almost certainly set.

The surprise entry on the Republican side was Michael J. Sullivan, a former United States attorney and former acting director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. He managed to collect more than 23,000 signatures in 12 days without the aid of hired hands, which he called a “groundswell of support” for his candidacy.

The two other Republicans are State Representative Daniel B. Winslow and Gabriel E. Gomez, a businessman and former member of the Navy SEALs, both of whom used paid workers to help gather the requisite signatures.

The Republicans had to scramble for signatures in a brief time frame, made all the more narrow by the announcement just four weeks ago by former Senator Scott P. Brown that he would not seek the seat. Mr. Brown would have had no competition in a primary. Until he bowed out, the field was frozen.

The Democratic primary has been set for some time. A lengthy list of possible candidates — including the actor Ben Affleck and Edward M. Kennedy Jr. — evaporated after Representative Edward J. Markey, the liberal dean of the Massachusetts Congressional delegation, indicated early on that he would run. The Democratic establishment quickly coalesced around Mr. Markey in an attempt to stave off challengers who could drain the party of money and resources in a primary.

But Representative Stephen F. Lynch, a former ironworker who is the most conservative member of the delegation, entered the race anyway, and has been whipping up support among the unions. He and Mr. Markey have agreed to a series of six debates in the roughly 10 weeks before the primary.

If Mr. Markey wins, it seems likely that he will prevail in June, if only because Massachusetts is so heavily Democratic. Mr. Markey supports abortion rights and same-sex marriage and has sought action to stop global warming.

If Mr. Lynch is the winner, the political calculus will change. Some of this positions — he opposed President Obama’s health care plan and has been against abortion rights — put him out of sync with many in his party. Since entering the race, he has softened his stance against abortion but still calls himself “pro-life.” At one time he opposed gay marriage but changed his view many years ago. He supports a ban on assault weapons; he said he voted against such a ban in Massachusetts once several years ago because it was too weak, which reflected the view of the gun lobby, but he supported the federal ban.

“If Lynch wins the primary, it gets dicier” for the Democrats to win the general election, said Jeffrey M. Berry, a political scientist at Tufts University. “Some Democrats might sit it out.”

All three Republican contenders are starting out as relatively obscure and underfunded, Mr. Berry noted. He said they would have to spend money to raise their profiles in the primary, which could leave them short of cash by June.

Mr. Sullivan opposes abortion rights and same-sex marriage; Mr. Winslow could have more appeal to Democrats since he supports both. Mr. Gomez has yet to articulate his positions on numerous issues.

While the Democratic National Committee is backing Mr. Markey, the Republican National Committee has not committed to backing the Republican nominee.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: March 1, 2013

An article on Thursday about a primary election in Massachusetts for the Senate seat relinquished by John Kerry misstated the timing of a decision by Representative Stephen F. Lynch, one of the Democratic contenders, to drop his opposition to same-sex marriage. He changed his position several years ago; he has not done so “since entering the race.” The article also overstated the degree to which Mr. Lynch has altered his positions since deciding to run. He has shifted on one — not “some” — issues. (He has softened his opposition to abortion, though he still calls himself “pro-life.”)

View the original article here

Joe Kennedy III Wins Primary for Barney Frank's Congressional Seat

BROOKLINE, Mass. — Days after Joseph P. Kennedy III stood in front of the Democratic National Convention to offer a tribute to his great-uncle, Senator Edward M. Kennedy, he found himself on a smaller platform just outside Boston, shaking hands with commuters at a public transit station here on the first day of his general election campaign in the Fourth Congressional District of Massachusetts.

Mr. Kennedy, 31, handily won his primary election Thursday, taking 90 percent of the vote in a contest with two relatively unknown rivals, Rachel Brown and Herb Robinson, and once again keeping the Kennedy name prominent in Massachusetts politics.

A former assistant district attorney and Peace Corps volunteer, Mr. Kennedy is hoping to take the seat occupied by Barney Frank, who announced last fall that he would retire after representing the district for more than 30 years.

“Those are very, very, very big shoes to fill,” said Bobbi Fox, 58, a software engineer who, like Mr. Frank, lives in Newton, Mass., and was chatting with Mr. Kennedy on Friday evening. She said that she planned to vote for Mr. Kennedy but that he still needed to prove himself to voters who probably knew more about his family than about him.

Mr. Kennedy’s challenger, Sean Bielat, shares the sentiment.

“Based on what I’ve seen from his résumé, it’s pretty thin,” said Mr. Bielat, who defeated Elizabeth Childs, a former state health commissioner, and David Steinhof, a dentist, in the Republican primary.

Mr. Bielat, 37, a businessman and a former Marine, ran an aggressive race against Mr. Frank in 2010.

View the original article here

Cuomo Endorses Rangel in Democratic Primary Race

Mr. Cuomo cited Mr. Rangel’s decades of service in Washington in arguing for his election to a 22nd term.

“He has seniority, he knows the system,” the governor, a fellow Democrat, said in an interview on “Capital Tonight,” a political program on the upstate cable network YNN.

Mr. Cuomo also said: “He’s been very good at bringing things back to the state of New York, which is a big part of what the Congress does.”

“And,” he added, “I think he is best suited not just for the district, but for his state. His seniority is a major asset for this state.”

For months, Mr. Cuomo told reporters that he would not talk about political subjects until after the conclusion of the legislative session. It ended on Thursday; the governor offered his endorsement of Mr. Rangel on Friday.

Mr. Cuomo also endorsed Assemblyman Hakeem S. Jeffries, who is running for the seat currently held by Representative Edolphus Towns of Brooklyn. Mr. Towns is retiring.

The governor has worked with Mr. Jeffries, most recently on a proposal to cut down on low-level marijuana arrests in New York City. The proposal died in the recently concluded legislative session, but Mr. Cuomo has said he will continue to pursue it.

Mr. Jeffries’s opponent, Councilman Charles Barron, ran for governor in 2010 to protest what he called a lack of diversity in state politics, and he heckled Mr. Cuomo at a dinner for minority lawmakers last year.

Mr. Cuomo also urged the re-election of Representative Nydia M. Velázquez of Brooklyn, who was a co-chairwoman of both his campaign for governor in 2010 and his transition team.

Ms. Velázquez is being challenged by Councilman Erik M. Dilan, who is backed by the Brooklyn Democratic chairman, Vito J. Lopez, and two others.

View the original article here

Primary Challenge to Rangel Turns Into a War of Endorsements

The incumbent, Representative Charles B. Rangel, and his most prominent primary opponent, State Senator Adriano Espaillat, have been engaged in a duel of endorsements in recent weeks, inviting reporters to City Hall, Harlem and the Bronx to hear their newest pledges of support.

Endorsements, analysts say, do not make much difference to voters, but the frequency of the announcements points to the peculiar dynamic in this race. Mr. Rangel, 81, who has been in Congress since 1971, is trying to signal to donors, the news media and the city’s political class that despite health issues and ethics concerns he is still going strong; Mr. Espaillat, in turn, is trying to show that Mr. Rangel has lost influential support.

“For Adriano, his endorsements are meant to show that he is getting traction, he’s building momentum, and that he himself is able to snatch away support from Charlie,” said Basil A. Smikle Jr., a political consultant who is not working for either candidate.

“For Charlie, it’s more of, ‘I still have support in this community, and the institutions that have been around, that people know, still support me.”

The endorsements also serve to remind the news media and voters that this year’s primary for federal offices is unusually early in New York: June 26. Mr. Rangel and Mr. Espaillat are both Democrats, and they will face each other in the primary, along with several other candidates. The district, which runs from Harlem to the northwest Bronx, is overwhelmingly Democratic, so the winner of the primary is expected to go on to win the general election in November.

John Gutierrez, an instructor in Latin American and Latino studies at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, described the endorsements as mostly “inside baseball” that would have little effect, unless they came with significant money and organizational support.

But he suggested that, for Mr. Rangel, the stream of announcements might serve as a substitute for more laborious campaigning that, because of his age and serious back problems, is more challenging this year.

“He’s not going to be at train stations, he’s not going to be visiting senior centers, he’s not going to be doing all of the retail politics that Adriano is, frankly, very, very good at,” Mr. Gutierrez said, adding, “Maybe for Charlie the endorsements sort of serve as an ‘in lieu of’ for campaigning.”

Mr. Espaillat has gathered the endorsements of, among others, two former Bronx borough presidents, Fernando Ferrer and Adolfo Carrion, Jr.; Councilman G. Oliver Koppell of the Bronx; a former congressman, Herman Badillo; and a state senator, Gustavo Rivera of the Bronx. Mr. Rangel has been endorsed by the current Bronx borough president, Ruben Diaz, Jr.; a Bronx congressman, Jose E. Serrano; and several members of the State Senate, the Assembly and the New York City Council. On Wednesday, Mr. Rangel was endorsed by Adam Clayton Powell IV — an endorsement rich with symbolism, because Mr. Rangel had unseated Mr. Powell’s father, Adam Clayton Powell Jr., in 1970, and the younger Mr. Powell had himself run against Mr. Rangel twice. On Friday, Mr. Rangel is expected to be endorsed by Assemblyman Guillermo Linares of Manhattan, whose support is significant because he, like Mr. Espaillat, is Dominican-American. Conspicuously, some prominent officials who have endorsed Mr. Rangel in the past appear to be sitting this year’s race out. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who taped campaign messages for Mr. Rangel two years ago, said recently that he had not yet made up his mind whether to get involved. And the White House spokesman, Jay Carney, when asked whether President Obama supported Representative Rangel, said “I’ll have to get back to you on that.” He did not.

Asked on Wednesday about the significance of endorsements, Mr. Rangel recalled some of the endorsements that he had received in recent years, including some in 2010, when he was under scrutiny for ethical lapses.

“In recent years, it has been a campaign that’s been endorsed by the mayor, the comptroller, the governors, and outstanding public officials from across the country,” he said.

“The endorsement announcements have highlighted a significant different in resources between the campaigns.

Wherever Mr. Rangel appears, a crowd of supporters materializes to hold signs and chant his name. When he announced the endorsement by Mr. Diaz, two dozen people stood behind him on courthouse steps, holding an arc of red, white and blue balloons. And when he was endorsed by Mr. Serrano, a group of men arrayed behind him on the City Hall steps responded defensively when a blogger asked an unwelcome question about Mr. Rangel’s house in the Dominican Republic.

“Charlie Rangel is the man! Charlie Rangel is the man!” they began chanting, drowning out further questions.

Mr. Espaillat, by contrast, is usually accompanied by only a few aides. A news conference in the Bronx on Monday to announce his endorsement by Councilman Koppell was so sparsely attended that it took place in a restaurant booth.

View the original article here

Senate Primary Over, New Battle Begins in Indiana

Democrats were casting the general election fight as a referendum on whether moderates should still have a place in Washington, while Tea Party organizers said it would be seen as a national test of the movement’s enduring strength.

Democratic leaders, who had doubted their odds against Mr. Lugar, a Republican so moderate that even the leaders admitted that plenty of Democrats liked him, sounded giddy about their November opponent: Richard E. Mourdock, a Tea Party-supported Republican who seized a remarkable 61 percent of the vote in part by denouncing bipartisanship and pledging to an unwavering conservative approach.

“Democratic donors across the country are going to see this as a prime pickup opportunity,” said Matt Canter, a spokesman for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, who added that the Indiana seat would fall among five top Republican-held seats being targeted in the fight for control of the Senate.

Labor leaders, too, said they saw an opportunity now in Indiana. “We’re all ramping up our plans as we speak,” said Nancy J. Guyott, president of the Indiana A.F.L.-C.I.O.

National conservative groups, some of which had poured more than $3 million to benefit Mr. Mourdock in the primary, were poised to send still more if needed. The number of such outside groups also appeared likely to grow if the contest here, against Representative Joe Donnelly, a Democrat, appears truly competitive — a notion some conservative leaders remained skeptical about, given Indiana’s Republican leanings.

“It’s a big race because a lot hinges on our success,” said Brendan Steinhauser, director of federal and state campaigns at FreedomWorks, which trains Tea Party members and which spent about $850,000 in Mr. Mourdock’s victory and plans to be similarly involved in the general election.

“If Mourdock were not to win,” Mr. Steinhauser said, the gloating would come not just from Democrats but establishment Republicans, pointing to the Tea Party. “They would want to blame that on us — ‘See, we told you so,’ ” he said.

By Wednesday, the outlines of a new political battle were emerging, with Democrats trying to paint Mr. Mourdock as a far-right candidate with little appeal for independents or moderate Republicans, and conservatives portraying Mr. Donnelly as a typical Democrat.

The Club for Growth, which had spent money on television and radio commercials against Mr. Lugar in the primary and said it would contribute more, if needed, in the general election, said Mr. Donnelly was “an economic liberal who votes in lock-step” with Democratic leaders.

Mr. Donnelly, who was elected in 2006 to represent a northern Indiana district, described himself as among the most conservative Democrats in the House in a moment when, he said, voters are looking for something different than they were in 2010. “Right now, it’s not about fire and brimstone,” he said. “It’s about jobs and the opportunity for your family to succeed.”

Although President Obama won Indiana in 2008, the state has long been a place where Republicans do well, and Mr. Obama is considered unlikely to win here again. None of it would seem to be fertile ground for a Democratic Senate bid, and some conservative leaders said they remained unconvinced that Mr. Mourdock would have any trouble in November.

But Dan Parker, the chairman of the Indiana Democratic Party, described Mr. Mourdock as an “extreme Tea Party candidate,” who would not appeal to a general election audience. “Dick Lugar was the mainstream Republican,” he said. “Indiana is not crazy conservative.”

Senator Chris Coons of Delaware, a Democrat, who rose from nowhere to be elected in 2010 after Republicans there rejected a popular moderate and nominated Tea Party favorite Christine O’Donnell, said he reached out to Mr. Donnelly Tuesday night after Mr. Lugar’s defeat.

“I think there’s a very good chance he could be the Chris Coons of 2012,” the senator said.

State Republican leaders, calling on Wednesday for party unity following Mr. Lugar’s loss, stood beside Mr. Mourdock on a stage here and seemed eager to play down his Tea Party ties and emphasize his traditional Republican credentials. Complicating the efforts, Mr. Lugar, who was not in attendance at the gathering, issued a sharp statement condemning what he suggested was a rising trend of rejecting political independence and bipartisan conversation.  

“He comes right out of the heart, right out of mainstream of our party, and I think that was really, among many, his longest single suit in the huge win that he had yesterday,” said Gov. Mitch Daniels, the governor, who had endorsed Mr. Lugar and had previously said he viewed Mr. Mourdock as a friend.

Indeed, Mr. Mourdock is in his second term as state treasurer, and he has been known for appearing at local Republican events and county dinners for years; when he announced his bid for the senate, he had a surprising majority of endorsements from the party’s county chairmen and chairwomen around the state.

“The first label they’re going to try to put on me is that Mourdock is this wild-eyed Tea Party guy,” Mr. Mourdock said. “But as the governor said, I’ve been swimming in the pool of Republican politics a long time,” he said, growing choked up as he described his love for the party.

Jonathan Weisman contributed reporting from Washington, and Steven Greenhouse from New York.

View the original article here

Immigration Policy at Issue in Primary for Sheriff in Travis County, Texas

Sheriff Greg Hamilton, first elected in 2004, is coming under increasing fire from his Democratic primary challenger, John Sisson, a retired Austin Police Department lieutenant, for his use of Secure Communities. The program, administered by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and in place statewide, compares the fingerprints of arrested individuals to a federal database to determine whether those individuals are eligible for deportation. If a person is found to be in violation, ICE requests that a detainer be placed on the individual for 48 hours, excluding weekends and holidays.

The federal government says the program is needed to ferret out violent immigrants or repeat immigration violators for deportation. But critics say that the system focuses on lower-level offenders rather than the more violent criminals. Mr. Sisson said Sheriff Hamilton grants detainers on every immigrant who is booked.

“I was appalled to see what it was doing to the Hispanic community and the immigrant community here,” Mr. Sisson said. “I felt like it was very inhumane to be lazy and not do the research and say, ‘We’ll just hold everybody for deportation and not even mess with the particulars.’ ”

Sheriff Hamilton said that he is merely following the law.

“The only one that can deport and put an immigration detainer on an individual is an ICE agent, not us,” he said. “At the Travis County Jail, we follow the law, and the law says that when an ICE detainer is put on, the law enforcement agency shall maintain that individual for 48 hours.”

From June 2009 to September 2011, Travis County submitted 80,731 fingerprint sets and removed 2,269 immigrants, including those who left voluntarily.

More than 900 were Level 3 offenders, convicted of misdemeanors that include traffic violations and drunken driving. There were 420 Level 1 offenders and 437 Level 2. Level 1 are aggravated felonies, including murder, rape, sexual abuse of a minor and drug trafficking. Level 2 offenders are convicted of any lesser felony or three misdemeanors.

Travis County’s number of removals surpasses that of Bexar County, where about 105,600 submissions were processed, resulting in the removal of 1,479 immigrants. Bexar County, which includes San Antonio, has a population of about 1,715,000, compared with Travis County’s population of 1,024,000.

But Sheriff Hamilton said deputies release immigrants if ICE agents do not take them and they are otherwise releasable on bond.

“Secure Communities identifies the individuals that are in our community that have run afoul of law enforcement,” he said. “And I think it’s very important that somebody knows who is in the community.”

But Sheriff Hamilton also cited his sensitivity toward the immigrant community, legal or otherwise, most of whom he said are in search of a better life. His wife is a naturalized citizen from Honduras, he said, and his department delivers aid to Austin’s Casa Marianella immigrant shelter.

“I have never asked a question, are they here legally or illegally,” he said. “I just want to help out.”

The winner of the May 29 Democratic primary will face Raymond Frank, a former sheriff and admitted underdog Republican candidate who identifies himself as an independent in the mold of Representative Ron Paul, Republican of Lake Jackson.

Mr. Frank has vowed to do away with the program if he is elected because it separates families. “A lot of Republicans are pretty outspoken about immigration,” he said. “And I don’t share their views at all.”

View the original article here

Federal Prisoner Fares Well in West Virginia's Democratic Primary

This year, West Virginia’s Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin and its Senator Joe Manchin, both Democrats, would not say whether they would vote for President Obama, laying bare the fact that the president faces an uphill climb even among members of his own party.

But the president’s campaign took a more bizarre blow during Tuesday night’s primaries in West Virginia, when a prisoner in Texas won more than 40 percent of vote in the Democratic race.

Keith Judd is serving a sentence of more than 17 years at Beaumont Federal Correctional Institution in Texas for extortion charges related to threats he made at the University of New Mexico in 1999.

According to unofficial primary results on the state’s election Web site, Mr. Judd earned 42.73 percent of the vote – 57,081 votes. Mr. Obama won 57.27 percent of the vote, with a final tally of 76,510 votes.

West Virginia has more registered Democrats than Republicans – 52.25 percent to 28.72 percent, at last count – but this state voted for Senator John McCain of Arizona in 2008 and has never warmed to Mr. Obama.

The administration’s clean-energy policies have not played well in the state’s huge coal and energy industry, and the state has frequently locked horns with the Environmental Protection Agency over its mine permitting process and, more recently, new reductions in carbon emissions standards.

“I voted against Obama,” said Ronnie Brown, 43, an electrician who says he is a conservative Democrat, to The Associated Press. “I don’t like him. He didn’t carry the state before, and I’m not going to let him carry it again.”

Despite Mr. Judd’s impressive performance, he will not get any delegates at the Democratic National Convention this summer because, according to The Charleston Gazette, nobody has volunteered to be one.

Mitt Romney, who, with 58,651 votes in West Virginia’s primary, barely edged out Mr. Judd, commented on the election earlier on Wednesday, according to ABC News. “I think they got more problems on that side of the aisle than we do on ours.”

View the original article here

Push is on for open primary in Arizona

Political moderates for years have bemoaned Arizona's partisan primary system.

Voter participation is typically light, they complain, giving outsize influence to diehard party activists who often are either more conservative or more liberal than most rank-and-file party members and independents. And Democratic or Republican voters in districts dominated by the other party frequently have little or no choice once the general election arrives.

Many centrists blame the status quo for the state's increasingly divisive political climate.

This year, Arizona voters may get the opportunity to overhaul the process. An initiative drive aims to place on the statewide ballot a proposition that would establish a new kind of open primary in which the top two vote-getters would face off in the general election.

All voters, including independents, could participate in the new "top two" primary, meaning the candidates would have to appeal to an array of voters beyond their ideological base in order to succeed. It would apply to all elections in the state except for nonpartisan municipal elections and the state's presidential-preference election.

"You're no longer voting for a nominee of the Democratic Party or a nominee of the Republican Party, you're winnowing down the number of candidates down to two," said David Berman, a senior research fellow at Arizona State University's Morrison Institute for Public Policy who has studied the issue.

"So, it's not a partisan primary anymore. It's a system by which you screen candidates down to the top two."

The pros and cons of the "top two" primary idea, which is in use in Louisiana and Washington and will go into effect in California this year, will be debated today during a panel discussion organized by the O'Connor House. The organization, named after retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's former home, advocates for centrist and nonpartisan policy solutions and civil discourse.

The event is scheduled for 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. at the Burton Barr Public Library, 1221 N. Central Ave., Phoenix. The event is free, but seats must be reserved through oconnorhouse.org.

Panelists set to appear at the O'Connor House forum include:

Grady Gammage Jr., a longtime Valley land-use attorney who helped write the Arizona primary initiative.

Alan Maguire, an Arizona political consultant who opposes the proposal.

Steve Peace, who led California's similar initiative campaign to passage.

Richard Winger, San Francisco-based publisher of Ballot Access News and a fierce critic of "top two" primaries.

Berman, of the Morrison Institute, said his research on "top two" primaries was somewhat constrained by the fact the system has been in operation for only two election cycles in Washington, although he said initial evidence is somewhat promising in terms of encouraging moderation.

His 2011 paper on the subject notes that Louisiana's process, which, unlike Arizona's proposal, allows top vote-getters to win outright in the primary if they garner more than 50 percent of the vote, "has not been regarded as having had much of an impact on party competition or voter participation," and its influence on moderation is unclear.

"There isn't a lot of history to find out exactly what's going to happen, but my impression is that there is a slight effect toward moderation just in the general tone because you have people who have to appeal to a broader electorate rather than just the party faithful," Berman said.

If Arizona voters pass this year's initiative, they will be trading traditional party primaries for a system similar to, but not exactly like, city elections. Candidates could still identify themselves on the ballot by their party or as an independent.

It's possible, and in some Arizona congressional and legislative districts even probable, that the top two vote-getters in the primary would belong to the same party.

Unlike in city elections, the top vote-getter would not be able to avoid the runoff by clearing more than 50 percent of the vote in the primary. A general-election match-up is guaranteed.

In the case of Arizona House of Representatives elections, where two seats are up for grabs in each legislative district, the top four contenders would head to the general election.

More than just shaking up the election process, the 2012 initiative "is about trying to change the outcomes so that we end up with a more reasoned debate and more people are included in the process," said former Phoenix Mayor Paul Johnson, who is helping spearhead the proposed ballot measure.

Today's partisan primaries require "ideological purity" and stoke hostility toward the other side, making bipartisan cooperation on major issues less likely, he said.

"Twenty years ago, it was normal for people to cross the aisle and work with other people and look for common ground. People felt like they had a responsibility to people in both parties," said Johnson, who was the 1998 Democratic gubernatorial nominee but is now registered as an independent. "Today, politics is a team sport. It's not about the state. It's not about the country. It's about: What team are you on, the blue team or the red team?"

However, Winger doubts the new system would have a substantial impact on the partisan rancor in the Arizona Legislature. The Democrats and the Republicans will concentrate on making sure their preferred candidates move forward, he said.

Winger also predicted it will be all but impossible for a third-party or independent candidate to break through and advance in a three-way primary race that includes two major-party candidates.

"We've seen how this system works in Louisiana for 38 years and in Washington state for four years," Winger told The Arizona Republic. "It just ends up with Democrats and Republicans being the only people who can run in the general election."

Berman didn't dispute that but noted Libertarians and other third-party candidates don't have much of a track record of attracting votes anyway.

"I don't think it'll hurt the major parties," Berman said. "It'll hurt the minor parties."

Jaime Molera, a Republican consultant and a former Arizona superintendent of public instruction, said the "top two" primary initiative is another bad idea from the same sort of government reformers who brought the state publicly funded campaigns, an Independent Redistricting Commission and the existing semi-open primary system in which independents can choose either the Democratic or Republican ballot. So far, none of those "fixes" has done much to make Arizona politics more moderate, he said.

The real problem, Molera said, is low voter turnout, and "I'm not sure there's any kind of a magic bullet that would fix that."

"Ultimately, people have to decide for themselves if they want to participate in a democracy," he said.

The Open Government Committee championing the "top-two" primary system has until July 5 to submit 259,213 valid petition signatures to secure a spot on the ballot for the initiative. If voters pass the measure, the "top two" primary would go into effect during the 2014 election cycle.

Copyright 2012 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Two Challenge Eddie Bernice Johnson in Dallas Democratic Primary

But Taj Clayton, a DeSoto lawyer, and State Representative Barbara Mallory Caraway of Dallas are giving it a try, arguing that it is time for Ms. Johnson to pass the baton in southern Dallas County’s District 30.

The challengers have gotten help. The Campaign for Primary Accountability, a bipartisan “super PAC,” is targeting longtime incumbents — including Ms. Johnson — in Congressional races across the nation.

Still, Ms. Johnson has her own big-time booster: President Obama, who generally stays out of such battles, has endorsed her. While she acknowledged that she has not had much primary opposition in her Congressional career, she said she has had general election opponents and does not feel threatened.

“I’ve never had a need for telling people what I’ve done,” she said. “They see I’m responsive to the people. It’s pretty visible.”

Mr. Clayton, a Harvard-educated lawyer with an ad campaign so polished it has made its own headlines, has his own connections to the president. His chief campaign consultant was Mr. Obama’s 2008 national field director. And Mr. Clayton has a compelling story: he is the grandson of Virginia sharecroppers and the son of Waxahachie factory workers. He worked his way through Harvard cleaning dormitory bathrooms and sweeping staircases.

Mr. Clayton, who served on Mr. Obama’s Texas finance committee in 2008, said he knows how allegiances work in Congress, and he is not deterred by the president’s support of Ms. Johnson.

“There have been some naysayers, those who said, ‘You aren’t going to be able to raise any money, she has everything sewn up, she’s been there forever,’ ” Mr. Clayton said. “My position was always, I feel called to do this. You’ve got to put the people first, want to see people in our district do better.”

Ms. Caraway has been unable to raise campaign money the way that Ms. Johnson and Mr. Clayton have. As of the April 15 primary filing deadline, she had $1,560 cash on hand, compared with Ms. Johnson’s $362,000 and Mr. Clayton’s $158,000. But she is an aggressive block walker and a well-known commodity in the district.

She was a Democratic precinct chairwoman before serving on the Dallas City Council for eight years, and she has been in the Legislature since 2007. Her husband, Dwaine Caraway, serves on the Dallas City Council and briefly served as the mayor — though their relationship made headlines last year after he called the police in the midst of a domestic disturbance in which Ms. Caraway reportedly wielded a knife. Many thought it might keep her from challenging Ms. Johnson; it did not.

“Even if I had a million dollars, my strategy would not change: I’m getting out every day and knocking on doors, meeting as many people as I can,” Ms. Caraway said. “If you check my prior history with elected office, I’ve always had a ground offensive, a grass-roots campaign. I’ve never been an establishment candidate.”

In Congressional District 30, the Democratic primary battle is the big one. Whoever wins will face a Republican and a Libertarian in the general election, but the district votes overwhelmingly Democratic.

Dallas political observers think Ms. Johnson is the obvious favorite. Renee Hartley, a Democratic political consultant, said that although Mr. Clayton is wildly charismatic and a great candidate, “I just don’t know that he’s going to be able to get his message as far and as wide and cut into what probably will be for her an overwhelming lead.” No amount of determination or shoe leather will do it for Ms. Caraway either, Ms. Hartley said.

Calvin C. Jillson, a political science professor at Southern Methodist University, predicts that Ms. Johnson will win north of 70 percent of the primary vote, but he added that Mr. Clayton — who “has raised a surprising amount of money” — and Ms. Caraway probably expect that and are priming themselves for future campaigns.

“Eddie Bernice Johnson is what, 76 at this point?” Dr. Jillson said. “So people are thinking ahead rather than thinking they can beat her directly.”

View the original article here

Five-Term Democrat Holden Loses in Pennsylvania Primary

Ten-term Representative Tim Holden of Pennsylvania was defeated in a Democratic primary on Tuesday, according to The Associated Press, losing to Matt Cartwright, a lawyer, who made Mr. Holden’s vote against President Obama’s health care law a major issue in the newly redrawn 17th District.

Mr. Holden, who is part of the Blue Dog Coalition of conservative Democrats, would become the second incumbent to lose to a newcomer in a House primary this season. This year, Representative Jean Schmidt, Republican of Ohio, was also defeated by a member of her own party. In both cases, the anti-incumbent “super PAC” Campaign for Primary Accountability has worked against the defeated House member.

In Mr. Holden’s case, the liberal League of Conservation Voters and MoveOn.org also piled on, taking advantage of a new district drawn by Republican legislators that is considerably more Democratic than Mr. Holden’s old seat. Center Forward, a group that is pro-Blue Dog Democrat, tried to bail out Mr. Holden with an advertisement last week attacking Mr. Cartwright. Mr. Holden himself had tried to portray his opponent as a corrupt lawyer wrapped up in a pay-to-play judicial scandal.

But ultimately, Mr. Cartwright’s own money may have made the biggest difference in a district where most Democratic voters had never been represented by Mr. Holden. Mr. Cartwright also hit Mr. Holden for voting with Republicans on some energy policies.

The incumbent was one of only 25 remaining Blue Dogs, whose ranks were decimated in the Republican surge of 2010 that wiped out most Democrats in Republican-leaning districts.

This post has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: April 25, 2012

An earlier version of this post, its summary and its headline misstated the number of terms Representative Tim Holden has served in the House. He is now in his 10th term, not his fifth.

View the original article here

Reagan Democrats’ could decide winner of Michigan primary - Boston Herald

SHELBY TOWNSHIP, Mich. — Mitt Romney has to win Michigan’s Republican primary Tuesday. So does Rick Santorum.

They’re going about it in very different ways.

Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, promotes himself as a "son of Detroit" who left to conquer the business world. His carefully scripted rallies feature not only reminiscences of the old Detroit area neighborhood, but also reminders of his history as a successful corporate turnaround artist.

Santorum, a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania, offers a different story. He roared into Michigan with strong momentum, having won three contests this month. His freewheeling stump speeches usually are laced with heartfelt reminders of his devotion to God and family.

Polls have shown Santorum and Romney running about even. A Romney loss in a state where, on paper, everything should go his way would be a serious blow. A Santorum defeat would raise new questions about his appeal beyond die-hard conservatives.

A victory by either man would demonstrate appeal in a blue-collar industrial state and give him an important boost in next week’s primary in neighboring Ohio.

Michigan Republicans are torn. Do the residents of this economically ailing state put aside their skepticism about the depth of Romney’s conservatism and choose the businessman who seems best positioned to win in November? Or do they follow their heart sand pick Santorum? And where does Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, who campaigned vigorously over the weekend, fit?

Shelby Township, a Detroit suburb visited by both Santorum and Romney in recent weeks, is in an area known in political circles as the suburbs that made famous "Reagan Democrats," rank-and-file workers who felt Democrats let them down economically and culturally and began voting Republican in the 1980s.

At Biggby Coffee on Van Dyke Avenue, the customers drink the $2 java and tell the state’s still-evolving Republican primary story.

"The jury’s out on who people like most," said franchise owner David Danyko.

Customers Stan Grot, Bo Chapman and Mike Torres have similar views — solidly conservative, eager for lower taxes and less regulation, and wary of President Barack Obama.

Grot supports Romney. Chapman prefers Santorum. Torres likes Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker who’s making virtually no effort in Michigan.

Grot, the township clerk, worked in manufacturing engineering at General Motors. He lost his job in 1980, spent a year on unemployment and left the Democratic Party.

"I listened to Ronald Reagan’s message," he said. "Ronald Reagan spoke to opportunity and personal responsibility. He created an environment so businesses could thrive."

Grot liked how the 1981 tax cuts put more money in consumers’ pockets, and he opened a restaurant in Hamtramck. He ran it for eight years before selling the place; it’s still thriving today.

View the original article here

Vermin Supreme Places Third in New Hampshire Democratic Primary (ContributorNetwork)

MANCHESTER, N.H. -- Vermin Supreme, the self-described "friendly fascist" who ran on a platform of mandatory dental hygiene and a pony for everyone, came in third in the New Hampshire Democratic primary.

According to the state's Secretary of State, Supreme racked up 829 votes for 1.4 percent of the vote, just 117 votes less than environmentalist Ed Cowan, who was the runner-up to Barack Obama. That was 380 more votes than Randall Terry, the anti-abortion activist who had a public falling out with his gay son, whom Vermin sprinkled with pixie dust at a lesser-known candidates forum at St. Anselm College.

Supreme claimed Jesus told him to glitter bomb Terry in order to transform him into a homosexual, according to the Union Leader.

Performance

The gray-bearded candidate, who can best be described as a performance artist, satirist and political activist, wears a distinctive outfit of a lime green jacket and multiple neck ties. He often wears a green plastic Hulk fist holding an American flag as a cod piece.

What is most distinct about Vermin Supreme's appearance is his headgear: a large black rubber boot known as a wader. His campaign slogan is, "A vote for me is a vote truly wasted."

Armed with a bullhorn, he popped up early for a Rick Santorum rally at a Manchester restaurant and took over the podium. "My name is Vermin Supreme. I am a friendly fascist. I am a tyrant that you can trust and you should let me run your life as I know what's best for you," he explained.

"As you know, all politicians are, in fact vermin. I am the Vermin Supreme, and that is why I am the most qualified candidate in this race at this time."

He then cut to the heart of the matter.

"Yes I am a politician. I will lie to you because as I have no reason not to. I will promise you anything your electoral heart desires because you are my constituents -- you are the informed voting public -- and because I have no intention of keeping any promise that I make."

Third's A Charm

This was the third-place candidate's third crack at the Democratic nomination, though only his second appearance in the New Hampshire primary, which featured 14 Democratic candidates this year.

Supreme first ran for the Oval Office in 2004, in Washington, D.C.'s Democratic primary. He first threw his boot into the ring in New Hampshire in '08, but compared to his 2012 finish, the outcome was disappointing. The 2008 Democratic primary featured Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Bill Richardson and Dennis Kucinich.

He took only 41 votes in that tough contest, perhaps because he sported a less-attractive galoshes-style boot rather than his impressive wader of 2012. He even ran in the general election, garnering 43 votes nationally, according to the Federal Elections Commission.

With the Democratic field again wide open in 2016, Vernon Supreme's horizons are endless. Makers of oral hygiene products and breeders of ponies will rejoice.

View the original article here

President Obama wins Democratic primary (AP)

CONCORD, N.H. – President Barack Obama has won New Hampshire's Democratic primary.

Obama, running uncontested, cruised to victory in voting Tuesday.

Far fewer voters participated in the Democratic primary than the competitive GOP primary, which was also being held on Tuesday.

Obama won New Hampshire in the 2008 general election, but he lost the Democratic primary four years ago. Hillary Rodham Clinton's narrow defeat of Obama, a dramatic upset coming after Obama's victory in the Iowa caucuses, led to a protracted race for the Democratic nomination.

View the original article here

Fake Democrats raise few funds for recall primary campaigns - Wausau Daily Herald

MADISON -- Fake Democratic candidates running in recall elections in order to give Republican incumbents more time to campaign have raised almost no money for the effort, reports filed with the state showed Wednesday.

The candidates, prompted by the state Republican Party, ran simply to force a primary and thereby delay the general election by a month in hopes of giving GOP incumbents more time to campaign.

Six Democratic primary elections are scheduled for Tuesday, with the winners facing the targeted Republican incumbents Aug. 9.

Five of the six fake Democrats whose reports were available Wednesday raised just $4,200 -- with nearly all the money coming from the Republican Party to help pay for copies and postage related to their filing as candidates.

A report for the sixth fake Democrat, James Smith of La Crosse, was not posted on the Government Accountability Board website by midday Wednesday.

While the protest candidates lie low, the legitimate Republicans and Democrats are raising tons of cash.

The six Democratic candidates combined have raised more than $1.5 million and had nearly $1 million in cash on hand. The Republican incumbents collectively raised about $2.4 million and had about $893,000 in cash on hand.

Four of the Republican incumbents raised more than their Democratic challengers, but two had less cash on hand entering the final weeks of the campaign.

The reports submitted Tuesday to the Government Accountability Board show incumbent Sens. Rob Cowles of Green Bay and Luther Olsen of Ripon face the biggest financial challenges.

In the 10th District, Olsen raised $107,000, compared with $227,000 for Democratic challenger state Rep. Fred Clark of Baraboo. Clark had $163,000 in cash on hand, compared with just $71,000 for Olsen.

In the 2nd District, Cowles raised $101,000, compared with $177,000 for Democratic opponent Nancy Nusbaum. She had $134,000 in cash on hand, and he had just $62,000.

Democrats need to win three seats to gain majority control in the Senate, giving them the power to block the Republican agenda. Three Democratic state senators also face recall elections. Their latest financial disclosure reports are due Monday.

Other Republicans facing recall elections are Sens. Alberta Darling of River Hills, Randy Hopper of Fond du Lac, Dan Kapanke of La Crosse and Sheila Harsdorf of River Falls.

In the 10th District, fake Democrat and hardware store owner Isaac Weix raised just $450 beyond a $750 in-kind contribution from the state Republican Party. He faces Democrat Shelly Moore in Tuesday's primary, with the winner moving on to face Harsdorf.

Four other fake Democrats -- Otto Junkermann, Gladys Huber, Rol Church and John Buckstaff-- all reported just a $750 contribution from the state Republican Party with no other
money raised or spent.

Junkermann faces Nusbaum on Tuesday, with the winner moving on to face Cowles. Huber is running in the 8th District against state Rep. Sandy Pasch, with the winner moving on to face Darling.

Church is running against Rep. Fred Clark, with the winner moving on to face Olsen. Buckstaff faces Democrat Jessica King on Tuesday with
the winner taking on Hopper.

The other protest candidate, Smith, is running against Democratic state Rep. Jennifer Shilling, with the winner facing Kapanke.

View the original article here