A Sneak Attack on Open Primaries

If there ever were an argument for term limits, it is in the recent antics of two termed-out state senators. Just hours before the deadline for placing constitutional amendments on the November ballot, Sens. Ross Johnson (R- Irvine) and Dede Alpert (D-San Diego) rushed through the Legislature a “poison pill” proposition designed to kill off an open primary initiative on the same ballot.

In 1996, voters passed an open primary initiative because they wanted choices in their elections. Because of the state’s gerrymandered districts and primaries closed to all but party loyalists, Californians will have fewer electoral choices this fall than Iraqi voters in their January elections.

At the behest of the two major political parties, the U.S. Supreme Court tossed out the 1996 measure, but the court directed how California could enact a constitutional open primary. Proposition 62 follows the court’s dictates. The senators’ poison pill, Proposition 60, tries to render the initiative unconstitutional even before voters have enacted it. Under Proposition 62, in all state or federal races except for president, the top two vote-getters, regardless of party, would square off in the general election.

Like a computer worm, Proposition 60 looks innocent enough. It includes a provision dealing with selling off surplus property and using the proceeds for debt reduction. This is a sound and popular idea. The senators hope voters will thus bite, releasing the virus that will kill off the open primary by rendering it automatically unconstitutional even if a majority of voters support it. But the politicians may have been too clever by half.

The Legislature’s chameleon strategy depends on voters not realizing what they are voting for. Legislators must camouflage their real intent because they are trying to save their skins from an increasingly hostile public.

Ninety-four years ago, Hiram Johnson ran for governor against a corrupt, railroad-controlled Legislature. He won fair and square, and ushered in an era of reform.

Today’s legislators realize they are probably no more popular with the public than the legislators of Johnson’s day. Knowing they cannot defeat the open primary in a fair election, they want to trick voters into doing it for them.

The game-playing doesn’t stop there. Although both parties intensely oppose the open primary, the California Republican Party is so paranoid about losing its sweetheart system of closed primaries that it is even willing to sacrifice its electoral chances this fall to retain it. The Republicans have voted to commit $1 million to the campaign against Proposition 62.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and GOP fundraisers may wonder why they’re raising money to elect more Republicans to office when the party is willing to waste its money on this venture. The GOP’s million dollars could fund a couple of Assembly races but will probably get lost in a statewide campaign against a proposition.

Republicans could face a situation in which President Bush could lose California to Sen. John F. Kerry by as many as a dozen percentage points. Their U.S. Senate candidate, former Secretary of State Bill Jones, is the last Republican before Schwarzenegger to hold a statewide office. Despite his strengths, his campaign has been starved for money, and he is 20 points or more behind his opponent, Sen. Barbara Boxer, in the polls. Another million dollars could be helpful to Jones’ and Bush’s prospects.

The GOP should do well in the down-ballot races this year. As many as a dozen Democratic Assembly seats could be “in play,” while only a handful of GOP-held seats are at risk. However, if Bush loses California by a wide margin, and Jones is swamped in the Senate race, Republicans could lose seats in the Legislature. They have, after all, lost legislative districts in the last four presidential elections.

So a million dollars thrown into the open primary fight would be a million dollars unavailable to help elect Republicans. Schwarzenegger will be at a greater disadvantage in his dealings with the majority-Democratic Legislature next year if his party doesn’t do well in the legislative elections.

Although Republicans may be more paranoid about the open primary, the leadership of both parties are tone-deaf to the public’s anger. Ted Costa, who spearheaded the recall of former Gov. Gray Davis, has crafted a new redistricting initiative that would break up the sweetheart districts both parties drew for themselves in 2001. Costa is hoping to have new districts in place for the 2006 election. Such legislative malfeasance as Proposition 60 only strengthens his case.

There is increasing talk, even from Schwarzenegger, of the need for a part-time Legislature. Just cut their pay and send them home. That will not affect Johnson and Alpert. The public already decided to end their pay and send them home when they enacted term limits 14 years ago. Trying to corrupt an initiative placed on the ballot by 900,000 Californians may well invite upon their colleagues the future punishment of new districts or a part-time Legislature. If that is the case, the two-thirds of legislators who voted with Johnson and Alpert to put Proposition 60 before the voters will have no one to blame but themselves.