‘Open’ Primary

* Re “ ‘Open’ Primary Would Shake Up State’s Elections,” by George Skelton, Capitol Journal, Jan. 18:

The “open” primary initiative is opposed by the hierarchies of the major political parties as well as most incumbent politicians, so it can’t be all bad. Extremists have always had the advantage of highly impassioned adherents, resulting in disproportionate financial and volunteer resources, as well as the tyranny of one-issue voting.

For 37 years, we have also allowed them to benefit from the divide (center left from center right) and conquer of the “closed” primary. No wonder the ideological bell curve of our elected politicians looks more like a dumbbell. I’m looking forward to elections where I can choose someone with whom I can identify.

GLENN STODDARD

Winnetka

* It is no wonder that voter turnout continues to decline and voter cynicism is overflowing, when party bosses control the primary election process. In a recent poll 65% of respondents expressed their dissat- isfaction with their own party. Under an open primary system, candidates would have to communicate their views to a broad spectrum of voters. They would have to put forth practical proposals, instead of empty slogans and party rhetoric. An open primary in California would allow voters to choose from a wider array of candidates, allow independent voters to have a say in primary elections and require elected officials to be accountable to a larger segment of their constituents.

NICHOLAS TOBEY

Los Angeles