Let’s talk primaries

In 2016, Colorado voters passed two propositions that allow the 1.8 million una liated (Independent) Colorado voters to vote in primaries both in federal and state-wide elections. e election saw the propositions win the popular vote despite the opposition of both parties. I think voters saw the unfairness of disallowing the largest group of voters from voting even though elections are paid for by all voters. e old policy smacked of “taxation without representation.” Voters might not know it, but our Constitution speci cally directs that voters own elections. Parties don’t own the election process, despite their calling them, “our primaries.” Voters also probably notice that with the participation of una liated voters, less extreme candidates win.

e voters made a good call, and we are beginning to look at rankedchoice voting in Colorado. It has been successfully used in Alaska and Maine. e ranked-choice approach has, according to voter surveys, resulted in better choices of broad candidate elds. It seems a perfect approach for primaries which usually attract many candidates. One

JIM ROHRER Columnist

other change would bene t our process. Republicans typically use winner-takeall primaries. Whoever gets the most votes gets all that state’s delegates. In the 2016 primary, the Republican nomination might have been di erent had the party apportioned state delegates based on the percentages of votes gotten by each candidate. is would be an ideal way to choose candidates for President as well as other important national candidates for the U.S. House and Senate. If you believe in “the more choices… the better,” open primaries and rankedchoice voting would give us a much superior system of choosing important candidates.

is, however, is not the way primaries are conducted in most of America. In 21 states at leased one party has openness for Independents. In 14 states primaries are closed, and in 15 states the primaries are semi-closed. Semi-closed refers to the fact that openness only comes after overcoming signi cant barriers. Ranked choice voting is only used in two states and only one party apportions delegates. Most voting laws and procedures are left to individual states so change would be painfully slow.

If my perfect primary system were in place, I believe the two candidates which most see as inevitable nominees would have a much tougher time getting their parties’ nomination. On the Democratic side, ranked choice voting might attract real competition for President Biden. Many believe he is too old, but out of respect for him as an incumbent, no one enters. If all states had open primaries, others would jump in seeking the support of Independents who make up 40% of voters. On the Republican side, my perfect system would give the many candidates a much better chance against Trump as his support comes primarily from a narrow sliver of very conservative voters which we call the base. In the current system, the base can nominate him, but less so in the perfect primary system.

Both parties oppose the changes I propose here, but I argue that what we are doing now to nominate our leaders is not working. I am with the founders when it comes to parties. In 1789, the United States had no political parties. In fact, most American leaders disliked even the idea of parties. “If I could not go to heaven but with a party,” said omas Je erson, “I would not go at all.” George Washington said it this way “Political parties eventually and gradually incline the minds of men to seek security… in the absolute power of an individual, leading to despotism.” So, I’ll conclude by pointing out that both parties are stuck with unpopular choices. We will likely get the despot Washington promised or someone well past his prime…. ose are our choices. We need to begin to improve the nomination process to do better.

Jim Rohrer of Evergreen is a business consultant and author of the books “Improve Your Bottom Line … Develop MVPs Today” and “Never Lose Your Job … Become a More Valuable Player.” Jim’s belief is that common sense is becoming less common. Contact Jim at jim.rohrer2@ gmail.com.