Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

still_one

(92,213 posts)
3. California has a modified open primary to avoid Constitutional issues
Sun Apr 24, 2016, 12:48 PM
Apr 2016

California has adopted a new modified open primary that only applies to office holders rather than Presidential delegate selections.

A third alternative is the "modified closed primary", as has been in effect in California since 2001. In California's primary since 2011 the voters are allowed as individual citizens to vote for any candidate, and the top two candidates regardless of party will advance to the general election. The Presidential election is exempt as it is a contest for delegates rather than a direct election for an office.

Prior to the California election reform of 2011, each political party could decide whether or not they wish to allow unaffiliated voters to vote in their party's primary. This appears to avoid the constitutional concerns of both the open and the closed primary. In the 2004 and 2006 primary elections, the Republican, Democratic, and American Independent parties all opted to allow unaffiliated voters to request their party's ballot. However, since the 2008 presidential primary election, only the Democratic and American Independent parties took this option, while the Republican party did not.[10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_primaries_in_the_United_States

For Presidential elections if you are registered with NPP(no party preference), before the primary, they will send you a card to select which ballot you want, a republican, Democratic, or independent ballot, etc. There is no mixing parties within a ballot for Presidential election primaries

Works well in California, though it does not apply to Presidential elections. Agnosticsherbet Apr 2016 #1
California has a modified open primary to avoid Constitutional issues still_one Apr 2016 #3
^People don't understand how things work in their own states, and playing it out will help expose WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2016 #11
SC has already ruled what SD is doing violates a party's freedom of association still_one Apr 2016 #2
Thanks I Thought that was the Case Stallion Apr 2016 #5
At least that is how I read it. If this passes in SD, it will be interest if they try to get it to still_one Apr 2016 #6
The party labels have been the MOST effective method for the elites FlatBaroque Apr 2016 #4
Unfortunately, lack of them will be even more helpful. Hortensis Apr 2016 #7
As a South Dakotan... IthinkThereforeIAM Apr 2016 #17
Hey, we really should have more reports from the states. Hortensis Apr 2016 #20
Good nadinbrzezinski Apr 2016 #8
Interesting point of Wellstone ruled Apr 2016 #9
In South Dakots that would mean two republicans running against each other Buzz cook Apr 2016 #10
buzz cook, you nailed it. saidsimplesimon Apr 2016 #14
Arkansas has non-partisan judicial elections. You have no idea if the person is a R or a D. LiberalArkie Apr 2016 #12
Exactly why I want to know their party affiliation... SoapBox Apr 2016 #16
It is not the job of the state to assist political parties to operate. L. Coyote Apr 2016 #13
I like to know who these candidates affiliate with... SoapBox Apr 2016 #15
Two top candidates - what if both are affiliated with the same jwirr Apr 2016 #18
Top two vote getters elections are HORRIBLE! Jubilant18 Apr 2016 #19
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Effort in South Dakota Ai...»Reply #3