----- Original Message ----- 
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 7:05 AM
Subject: Article in today's SF Chronicle

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/11/20/MN214366.DTL

San Francisco Chronicle
November 20, 2002

Open primary idea gets new life
Business lobby crafts revised plan, hopes voters get to decide

Paul Feist, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau

Sacramento -- Hoping to increase voter turnout and weed out political
ideologues in the Capitol, California's business lobby is laying the
groundwork for a ballot initiative to switch back to open primary
elections.

Voters approved an open primary system in 1996, but the U.S. Supreme
Court struck it down four years later on First Amendment grounds after
the state Democratic and Republican parties argued it meddled with
their ability to nominate candidates.

Business interests led by the California Chamber of Commerce say
they've come up with a version of the open primary that will pass
constitutional muster.

"We have some serious disengagement of voters," said Bill Hauck,
president of the California Business Roundtable. "They're so
discouraged by the existing system that they've thrown up their
hands."

Hauck said the coalition of business interests will spend "whatever it
takes" to put the measure on the November 2004 ballot.

Critics already are attacking the plan as a ploy by big business to
advance its agenda in Sacramento and squelch third parties.

Under the proposal, all candidates for legislative and constitutional
offices would be identified by political party but appear together on
the primary ballot. The two top vote-getters -- regardless of party --
would compete in the general election.

The key difference between the new proposal and California's old open
primary system -- technically known as a "blanket" primary -- is that
voters wouldn't be selecting a party nominee. That's important because
the court said an open primary system that did not select party
nominees would be constitutional. About 20 other states have such open
primaries that have passed constitutional muster.

Under the old open primary system, voters could cross party lines and
vote for any candidate, but a nominee from each party advanced to the
general election.

Backers of the open primary plan say it would give voters more
choices, produce more moderate lawmakers and create greater interest
in the electorate after this month's record-low turnout.

Redistricting has produced "safe" legislative districts, they argue,
meaning the elections are essentially decided in party primaries with
low turnouts that attract highly partisan voters.

The proposed open primary could have a dramatic effect on legislative
races in San Francisco, for example, where Republican voter
registration is low.

Had the system been in place this year, Assembly candidates Harry
Britt and Mark Leno, both Democrats, would have advanced to the
general election, said Tony Quinn, a veteran analyst of legislative
elections who is assisting the chamber. That matchup would have been
more meaningful than the one that pit Leno against a Republican, he
said, because San Francisco almost never elects a GOP candidate.

Art Torres, chairman of the state Democratic Party, said the chamber's
proposal is a vehicle to take over ideological control of the
Legislature and roll back victories by organized labor such as minimum
wage and eight-hour workday laws.

"It would destroy political parties as we know them by not allowing an
interesting discussion about political ideology," Torres said. "We'd
have Democrats running against Democrats and Republicans running
against Republicans (in general elections). How does that serve
democracy?"

Karen Hanretty, a spokeswoman for the state Republican Party, said the
GOP opposed the last experiment with an open primary and probably
wouldn't support the chamber's new proposal.

She said the GOP has already agreed to allow decline-to-state voters
-- so- called independents -- the option of voting in its primary,
giving some measure of choice to nonpartisan voters. The Democratic
Party also allows decline-to-state voters in its primaries.

Major parties aren't the only ones opposed to the proposal.

"What this is is a plan to abolish third parties," said Peter Camejo,
the Green Party candidate who took 5.3 percent of the vote statewide
in the gubernatorial election and finished second in San Francisco
with 15.8 percent of the vote.


Sacramento Bureau Chief Greg Lucas contributed to this report.
E-mail Paul Feist at pfeist@sfchronicle.com.