Opinion: Prop. 14 would weaken democracy, voter choice

I had the following opinion piece published today in the San Jose Mercury News, one of the largest daily papers in the state.

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_15071881?nclick_check=1

Opinion: Prop. 14 would weaken democracy, voter choice
By Michael Feinstein
Special to the San Jose Mercury News

When most Americans took high school civics, we were taught that the purpose of elections was to represent the people in government. Proposition 14's advocates are trying to sell their electoral scheme by promising it will deliver representatives of a particular political bent. Since when did the purpose of elections change from representing the people — whatever their views — to socially engineering a specific result?

As a Green Party member, I believe we share a belief with most Californians in equality of opportunity, but not necessarily of outcome. To us the best system of government is one that truly reflects the electorate in all its diversity, and then operates on the basis of majority rule. Blinded by the prospect of a prearranged result, Proposition 14 supporters are advocating an electoral system that could backfire on our state.

By eliminating party primaries, Proposition 14 would put greater emphasis on name recognition and early fundraising, increasing the corrupting influence of big money and making it harder for competing candidates and movements to survive, let alone contend. Because of the additional pressure not to "split the primary vote" of their party's faithful, incumbents and well-funded candidates would be more able to "clear the field" and squeeze out other candidates, putting more power into the hands of party machines and insiders to, de facto, select general election candidates. As a result, Proposition 14 would stifle diversity and competition within the major parties, limit the choices of independent voters and drive minor parties off the ballot.

This last point is worth repeating, because Proposition 14 supporters conveniently and consistently omit it. In California parties can stay on the ballot by receiving at least 2 percent of the vote in the general election for offices like governor or secretary of state. But if Proposition 14 passes, independent smaller parties won't be on the statewide general election ballot, so they can't retain party status that way.

The other method is to have a certain number of voter registrations. But if this were the only method available, the Libertarians and the Peace and Freedom Party would already be off the ballot, and the Green Party would be under threat. Once a party no longer appears in general elections, it will be harder for it to recruit and retain members.

Why should most voters care? The threat to California's smaller parties is a canary in the coal mine about what's wrong with Proposition 14. A system that truly worked for all voters would give them more, not fewer, opportunities to elect representatives who reflect their views. Eliminating candidates and parties to choose from is not the way to get there.

Ironically, data doesn't back up Proposition 14 supporters' claim that it would elect more "moderates" (who's to say what moderate is, anyway?). Experience in Louisiana and Washington with similar "top two" primary elections have served as incumbent protection plans but done little to shift political discourse. Washington's version is subject to trial in U.S. District Court on its constitutionality this October, while Louisiana's is hardly a model of government for California to emulate.

Unlike the high-risk Proposition 14 lottery, there are electoral systems that have been in place for decades around the world that our state could openly compare and contrast. Why not consider multiseat districts with proportional representation, where Democrats and Republicans could win seats according to their percentage of the vote, along with parties like the Greens if they have enough support, as in Europe?

But whatever the approach, changing our democracy should be about embracing our state's extraordinary diversity with more choice, not less. Vote no on Proposition 14.


MICHAEL FEINSTEIN is the co-chairman of the Green Party of the United States and a former mayor and city councilman in Santa Monica. He wrote this article for this newspaper.