Unlikely Allies Battle Open Primaries in Court

The landmark nature of the federal trial that began here Monday is clear by the seating arrangements in the courtroom.

On one side, the chairmen of the state Democratic and Republican parties sat side by side, sometimes leaning over to whisper in each other’s ears. At the other counsel’s table are lawyers for the state attorney general and the California secretary of state.

This is a dispute about how California is going to select its future candidates and whether it will abide by the open primary system that voters demanded last year when they passed Proposition 198.

Right now, that is the law of the land and it is defended by the state’s official legal counsel, the attorney general. But if it is allowed to stand, the two major political parties--joined in court by some of their smaller counterparts--complain that it would destroy their organizations.

“People have to stand up at some point and take a stand on principles,” state Democratic Party Chairman Art Torres testified Monday in U.S. District Court. “I believe a party has a right to choose its nominees.”

If Proposition 198 remains in place for next year’s election, voters will receive a primary ballot that lists the names of all the candidates from every party who are running for a particular office. The voter will be allowed to select any candidate, regardless of the voter’s party registration or the candidate’s.

Only two states--Alaska and Washington--have similar primary systems.

Proponents say part of the reason for the change is to encourage participation in the process by giving more power to the voter. But it is also the brainchild of political moderates who complain that too much of the early primary process has been controlled by extremists and their ideas.

They say the rank and file of the Republican Party is further right than the California electorate and that Democratic Party activists are further left. As a result, they complain, the selection process helps candidates who are not best suited to win a general election or appeal to a majority of Californians.

With an open primary system, Proposition 198 supporters contend, a moderate candidate could win by appealing for crossover support from voters in an opposition party.

A prime example is Rep. Tom Campbell (R-Stanford), one of the leading proponents of Proposition 198. Strategists believe that history might have changed if Campbell could have pitched his support for abortion rights to Democratic voters when he narrowly lost the 1992 GOP primary for U.S. Senate to conservative Bruce Herschensohn. Herschensohn was later defeated by Democrat Barbara Boxer.

That idea, however, has frosted much of the state’s political leadership from both parties. They are outraged at the possibility that Democrats or Republicans could be forced to support a nominee who won a primary with the help of opposition party voters.

In November, the state Democratic Party--followed by the Republican Party--challenged Proposition 198 in federal court on the basis that it denies their 1st Amendment right of free association. Both insisted that the decision of selecting a candidate to represent the party in a general election should be limited to that party’s registered members.

In court Monday, both party leaders raised grave concerns about the political process if open primaries are allowed.

The federal nonjury trial that began Monday is scheduled to last at least three days. A decision from Judge David F. Levi is not expected for several weeks. Party leaders believe that next year’s election will be run under the rules set by Levi because there probably will not be time for an appeal before the deadlines pass to set next year’s primary ballot.

In addition to the Democratic and Republican leaders, testimony from other party officials Monday described how the parties select their governing bodies and platforms. Because many decision-making roles are based on election results, the officials complained that their party leadership could be infiltrated by rivals intent on doing mischief.

“This is much akin to the Dodgers choosing the Giants lineup,” said Gary Shay, chairman of the Democratic Party’s rules committee.

A spokesman for the Democratic National Committee also warned that California could face sanctions from party headquarters in Washington because of a rule prohibiting the selection of officers by non-Democrats.

State Republican Party Chairman Michael Schroeder complained that the change could significantly drive up the cost of campaigns because candidates would be forced to appeal to all voters, not just those within their party.

Torres agreed. “You are going to have to run two general election campaigns,” he said.