Jul 24, 2010
Last month, Big Business interests
shamelessly dealt our already depleted democracy a devastating blow by
misleading California voters into approving Proposition 14, without
their opponents being able to reach the people with rebuttals. This
voter initiative provides that the November elections in that state for
members of Congress and state elective offices are reserved only for the
top two vote-garnering candidates in the June primary.
There
are no longer any party primaries per se, only one open primary.
Voters can vote for any candidate on the ballot for any office.
Presidential candidates are still under the old system.
Since the two major parties are the wealthiest and have the power of
incumbency and favored rules, the "top two" as this "deform" is called,
will either be a Republican and a Democrat or, in gerrymandered
districts, two Republicans or two Democrats.
Goodbye to voter choices for smaller third party and independent
candidates on the ballot in November who otherwise would qualify, with
adequate signature petitions, for the ballot. Goodbye to new ideas,
different agendas, candidates and campaign practices. The two Party
tyranny is now entrenched in California to serve the barons of big
business who outspent their opponents twenty to one for tv and radio ads
and other publicity.
To seal this voter incarceration by the two-party duopoly, Proposition
14 decreed that even write-in votes in November by contrarian citizens
could no longer be counted.
The Democratic and Republican Parties nominally opposed it, devoting
very little money or staff to show their seriousness. Their principal
complaint is that the Proposition opens a larger door for known
celebrities to jump into the race and disrupt the Parties'
command-and-control systems.
The prior public debate over Proposition 14, for those who noticed the
measure, was strange. First, the Ballot Book, sent to voters, misled
voters by describing the measure as one that "Increases Right to
Participate in Primary Elections." In fact, it wipes out all other
candidates on other lines but the top two vote-getters in November,
thereby decreasing the right to participate in the general election.
Second, many of the state's largest newspapers, except for the conservative Orange County Register, editorially endorsed Proposition 14, saying it would reduce "partisan bickering."
As detailed in Ballot Access News, Richard Winger, the San Jose Mercury News claimed the measure would not harm minor party candidates. Their one example of a Green Party legislator was erroneous. The Monterey County Herald inaccurately claimed the League of Women Voters had endorsed the initiative. The Sacramento Bee,
supported it, saying that the Green Party could well place first or
second in San Francisco. The Greens never placed first or second in
blanket primary years, according to the super-accurate, Mr. Winger.
Indeed, the smaller Parties all opposed Proposition 14. These included
the Peace & Freedom Party, the Libertarian Party, and the Green
Party. The energetic ballot-access group Free & Equal developed the
leading web page (freeandequal.org) against the measure, and along with
Californians for Electoral Reform used their tiny budgets to organize
lightly covered press conferences to inform the public.
The final vote was 53.7% for and 46.3% against. The pro side
advertisements, distorted as they were, reached millions of more voters
than did the penurious opposition.
Curiously, if the by-mail voters were taken out of the equation, more
voters who went to the polls on election day voted against Prop 14 (52%)
than for it (48%). Winger suggests this difference may reflect the
fact that election day voters benefited from the fuller public
discussion of the Proposition 14, including its negatives, in the two
weeks before election day.
Supporters of a "top two" scheme want to spread it throughout the
country, with Michigan as the next stop. Already, Washington state
enacted "top two" for the 2008 election. Predictably, it resulted in a
"Democratic-Republican monopoly on the ballot [in November] for all
congressional and all statewide state offices," reports Winger.
The Washington state law is being challenged in the courts. Opponents
of Proposition 14 assert they too will file a lawsuit challenging this
censorious law, on constitutional grounds, in the federal courts.
The constant squeeze plays on the peoples' democratic procedures to have
a voice, to participate, challenge and dissent extends from the courts
to the patsy regulatory agencies and the elections.
Ballot access obstacles are not enough for the monetized minds of
corporations. Better, they say, to abolish election day altogether for
minor parties and independent candidates.
What's next for the corporate supremacists, who misled and lied to the
people to get their vote for Prop 14? When will the people awake and
repeal it?
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Ralph Nader
Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate and the author of "The Seventeen Solutions: Bold Ideas for Our American Future" (2012). His new book is, "Wrecking America: How Trump's Lies and Lawbreaking Betray All" (2020, co-authored with Mark Green).
Last month, Big Business interests
shamelessly dealt our already depleted democracy a devastating blow by
misleading California voters into approving Proposition 14, without
their opponents being able to reach the people with rebuttals. This
voter initiative provides that the November elections in that state for
members of Congress and state elective offices are reserved only for the
top two vote-garnering candidates in the June primary.
There
are no longer any party primaries per se, only one open primary.
Voters can vote for any candidate on the ballot for any office.
Presidential candidates are still under the old system.
Since the two major parties are the wealthiest and have the power of
incumbency and favored rules, the "top two" as this "deform" is called,
will either be a Republican and a Democrat or, in gerrymandered
districts, two Republicans or two Democrats.
Goodbye to voter choices for smaller third party and independent
candidates on the ballot in November who otherwise would qualify, with
adequate signature petitions, for the ballot. Goodbye to new ideas,
different agendas, candidates and campaign practices. The two Party
tyranny is now entrenched in California to serve the barons of big
business who outspent their opponents twenty to one for tv and radio ads
and other publicity.
To seal this voter incarceration by the two-party duopoly, Proposition
14 decreed that even write-in votes in November by contrarian citizens
could no longer be counted.
The Democratic and Republican Parties nominally opposed it, devoting
very little money or staff to show their seriousness. Their principal
complaint is that the Proposition opens a larger door for known
celebrities to jump into the race and disrupt the Parties'
command-and-control systems.
The prior public debate over Proposition 14, for those who noticed the
measure, was strange. First, the Ballot Book, sent to voters, misled
voters by describing the measure as one that "Increases Right to
Participate in Primary Elections." In fact, it wipes out all other
candidates on other lines but the top two vote-getters in November,
thereby decreasing the right to participate in the general election.
Second, many of the state's largest newspapers, except for the conservative Orange County Register, editorially endorsed Proposition 14, saying it would reduce "partisan bickering."
As detailed in Ballot Access News, Richard Winger, the San Jose Mercury News claimed the measure would not harm minor party candidates. Their one example of a Green Party legislator was erroneous. The Monterey County Herald inaccurately claimed the League of Women Voters had endorsed the initiative. The Sacramento Bee,
supported it, saying that the Green Party could well place first or
second in San Francisco. The Greens never placed first or second in
blanket primary years, according to the super-accurate, Mr. Winger.
Indeed, the smaller Parties all opposed Proposition 14. These included
the Peace & Freedom Party, the Libertarian Party, and the Green
Party. The energetic ballot-access group Free & Equal developed the
leading web page (freeandequal.org) against the measure, and along with
Californians for Electoral Reform used their tiny budgets to organize
lightly covered press conferences to inform the public.
The final vote was 53.7% for and 46.3% against. The pro side
advertisements, distorted as they were, reached millions of more voters
than did the penurious opposition.
Curiously, if the by-mail voters were taken out of the equation, more
voters who went to the polls on election day voted against Prop 14 (52%)
than for it (48%). Winger suggests this difference may reflect the
fact that election day voters benefited from the fuller public
discussion of the Proposition 14, including its negatives, in the two
weeks before election day.
Supporters of a "top two" scheme want to spread it throughout the
country, with Michigan as the next stop. Already, Washington state
enacted "top two" for the 2008 election. Predictably, it resulted in a
"Democratic-Republican monopoly on the ballot [in November] for all
congressional and all statewide state offices," reports Winger.
The Washington state law is being challenged in the courts. Opponents
of Proposition 14 assert they too will file a lawsuit challenging this
censorious law, on constitutional grounds, in the federal courts.
The constant squeeze plays on the peoples' democratic procedures to have
a voice, to participate, challenge and dissent extends from the courts
to the patsy regulatory agencies and the elections.
Ballot access obstacles are not enough for the monetized minds of
corporations. Better, they say, to abolish election day altogether for
minor parties and independent candidates.
What's next for the corporate supremacists, who misled and lied to the
people to get their vote for Prop 14? When will the people awake and
repeal it?
Ralph Nader
Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate and the author of "The Seventeen Solutions: Bold Ideas for Our American Future" (2012). His new book is, "Wrecking America: How Trump's Lies and Lawbreaking Betray All" (2020, co-authored with Mark Green).
Last month, Big Business interests
shamelessly dealt our already depleted democracy a devastating blow by
misleading California voters into approving Proposition 14, without
their opponents being able to reach the people with rebuttals. This
voter initiative provides that the November elections in that state for
members of Congress and state elective offices are reserved only for the
top two vote-garnering candidates in the June primary.
There
are no longer any party primaries per se, only one open primary.
Voters can vote for any candidate on the ballot for any office.
Presidential candidates are still under the old system.
Since the two major parties are the wealthiest and have the power of
incumbency and favored rules, the "top two" as this "deform" is called,
will either be a Republican and a Democrat or, in gerrymandered
districts, two Republicans or two Democrats.
Goodbye to voter choices for smaller third party and independent
candidates on the ballot in November who otherwise would qualify, with
adequate signature petitions, for the ballot. Goodbye to new ideas,
different agendas, candidates and campaign practices. The two Party
tyranny is now entrenched in California to serve the barons of big
business who outspent their opponents twenty to one for tv and radio ads
and other publicity.
To seal this voter incarceration by the two-party duopoly, Proposition
14 decreed that even write-in votes in November by contrarian citizens
could no longer be counted.
The Democratic and Republican Parties nominally opposed it, devoting
very little money or staff to show their seriousness. Their principal
complaint is that the Proposition opens a larger door for known
celebrities to jump into the race and disrupt the Parties'
command-and-control systems.
The prior public debate over Proposition 14, for those who noticed the
measure, was strange. First, the Ballot Book, sent to voters, misled
voters by describing the measure as one that "Increases Right to
Participate in Primary Elections." In fact, it wipes out all other
candidates on other lines but the top two vote-getters in November,
thereby decreasing the right to participate in the general election.
Second, many of the state's largest newspapers, except for the conservative Orange County Register, editorially endorsed Proposition 14, saying it would reduce "partisan bickering."
As detailed in Ballot Access News, Richard Winger, the San Jose Mercury News claimed the measure would not harm minor party candidates. Their one example of a Green Party legislator was erroneous. The Monterey County Herald inaccurately claimed the League of Women Voters had endorsed the initiative. The Sacramento Bee,
supported it, saying that the Green Party could well place first or
second in San Francisco. The Greens never placed first or second in
blanket primary years, according to the super-accurate, Mr. Winger.
Indeed, the smaller Parties all opposed Proposition 14. These included
the Peace & Freedom Party, the Libertarian Party, and the Green
Party. The energetic ballot-access group Free & Equal developed the
leading web page (freeandequal.org) against the measure, and along with
Californians for Electoral Reform used their tiny budgets to organize
lightly covered press conferences to inform the public.
The final vote was 53.7% for and 46.3% against. The pro side
advertisements, distorted as they were, reached millions of more voters
than did the penurious opposition.
Curiously, if the by-mail voters were taken out of the equation, more
voters who went to the polls on election day voted against Prop 14 (52%)
than for it (48%). Winger suggests this difference may reflect the
fact that election day voters benefited from the fuller public
discussion of the Proposition 14, including its negatives, in the two
weeks before election day.
Supporters of a "top two" scheme want to spread it throughout the
country, with Michigan as the next stop. Already, Washington state
enacted "top two" for the 2008 election. Predictably, it resulted in a
"Democratic-Republican monopoly on the ballot [in November] for all
congressional and all statewide state offices," reports Winger.
The Washington state law is being challenged in the courts. Opponents
of Proposition 14 assert they too will file a lawsuit challenging this
censorious law, on constitutional grounds, in the federal courts.
The constant squeeze plays on the peoples' democratic procedures to have
a voice, to participate, challenge and dissent extends from the courts
to the patsy regulatory agencies and the elections.
Ballot access obstacles are not enough for the monetized minds of
corporations. Better, they say, to abolish election day altogether for
minor parties and independent candidates.
What's next for the corporate supremacists, who misled and lied to the
people to get their vote for Prop 14? When will the people awake and
repeal it?
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.