The Trouble With Measure 65 -- by Wayne Baum

The most charitable thing that can be said about Measure 65 is that it is a case of good intentions gone awry.  According to its proponents this measure is intended to give “independent” voters a voice in the primary election;  increase voter turnout; and promote the selection of more “mainstream” candidates. In fact,  just the opposite is likely.  Louisiana, the only state with extensive experience with a similar system has been in the bottom 1/3rd of the country for voter turnout over the past decade.  Likewise, white supremacist David Duke, running in a virtual one party district was twice able to advance to the Louisiana general election because votes were split over several more moderate candidates.  Neighboring Washington State just completed their first “top two” primary.  They have 8 legislative races going into the general election with just one party represented.  Their turnout did not improve either:  42% vs. Oregon's 58%.

The current party based system denies no one the right to participate in the primary election process.  We have two major and multiple minor parties representing a broad spectrum of candidates and philosophies.  Voters are free to register (or re-register) in any of them.  Thousands of Oregonians did just that in this year's primary when they became Democrats in order to choose between Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton.  Registration is a simple matter and nothing prevents those individuals from switching back to their previous designation if they so choose.

Measure 65 permits only the top two vote getters, regardless of party, to advance to the general election.  In areas where Republicans and Democrats dominate, only those party's candidates would  likely prevail and continue on to the general election.  Where one party dominates,  that party's top two candidates would be the only choice in the general election. Minor parties, regardless of size, presently enjoy a place on the general election ballot. Under M65 they would disappear altogether from the general election.   

Under Measure 65 anyone registered with a party could place their name on the ballot as that party's candidate. The result: Multiple names under that party's banner with some possibly recruited by the opposition to confuse and/or dilute the vote.  Parties would be able to designate their “official” candidate but that would require a less than transparent selection process than we currently have.  In any case, the cost of running in the primary would go up dramatically because candidates would be seeking votes from the entire pool of registered voters rather than from within their own party.  The influence of Big Money cannot be underestimated in such a system.