FLASHREPORT

ONTO THE NEXT BATTLE -- THE BATTLE FOR IDEAS: REJECTING A "CLOSED GENERAL ELECTION" SYSTEM

Keith Carlson, Treasurer, California Republican Party

[Publisher's Note:  Last Tuesday, Californians rejected Propositions 1A-1E, the substantive alleged "reforms" placed on the ballot by California's political insiders.  But there is one more substantive measure, another "insiders play" coming to the voters next year... Keith Carlson writes about the Closed General Election scheme below...  Flash]

If you are new to the FlashReport, please check out the main site and the acclaimed FlashReport Weblog on California politics.

The final piece of the cynical deal that gave us this year’s budget, and Props 1A-F, is still coming.  The deception of reform--so soundly rejected by the people this week—now moves to the next phase.  This time, rather than sneaking a massive tax increase into an initiative, the so-called “reformers” (the very politicians who got us into this mess) will be forcing a vote to remove political parties from a meaningful role in the political process.

Phase One of their plan was to take more of your physical property through higher taxes.  It was, you’ll recall, inconceivable that the government shouldn’t go right on growing—the government had to consume more.  So they passed their tax increase, and tried to sneak another one by the voters.  We said ‘no.’

We must also say ‘no’ to Phase Two.  That’s their plan to (for all practical purposes) take our intellectual property.  They’ll do this by eviscerating political parties, thus taking our right to associate as we choose, with whom we choose.  This, in turn destroys the people’s ability to offer differing political ideas as to how we govern ourselves.

“Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected.  No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions…Government is instituted to protect property of every sort…Conscience is the most sacred of all property.”  So wrote James Madison in 1792.  His concern directly applies to the plan to fetter our right to associate in the political parties of our choosing.  His fear of government having “an excess of power” prevailing applies more to California than any other state—just look at our tax burden compared to others. 

But that tax burden is not the problem according to the Sages of Sacramento.  The problem is that political parties produce candidates who hold to their beliefs (the Sages see this as a very bad thing—despite the Average Joe thinking someone living up to their word is a noble thing.)  The Republicans’ beliefs don’t align with the Democrats’ beliefs.  This lack of harmony vexes the Sages (it’s like a disturbance in the Bureaucratic Force) as it makes it harder to pass a bloated budget.  If they could just get lawmakers who all understood the importance of an ever-expanding government, then all would be well again.  But are we better off with the ideological nudge from Gov. Davis to Gov. Schwarzenegger?  Didn’t the times that produced ideologically different governors like the Browns and Reagan come in a more prosperous era—both for our budget and our political discourse?

To Sages, however, contests over ideas are less important than the steady march of state government.  Plus, political battles are messy.  So the Sages want to do away with them.  How to do this?  Eliminate competition in the General Election.  The Sages will tell you it is an “Open Primary” but that isn’t really what it is about. 

By design, the Primary is a courtesy the state affords to political parties.  Primaries do not select lawmakers.  They are simply the election when parties choose their standard bearers to take their ideas to the voters.  The General election, however, is when the voters choose whose ideas they think work best—when an actual lawmaker is chosen.  Absent the Party selection process, there is actually no need for a Primary at all.  If the Sages seek to remove the Parties’ right, and ability, to choose a standard bearer, then they ought to just have one big General Election.  Why pay for two?

The reason they seek to keep two, despite the extra cost to their out-of-whack budget, is cynical and deceptive.  It is designed to actually create a Closed General Election—not an Open Primary Election.  They’ll call it that because the Sages bet the people will think “Open” sounds nice-- kind of like “spending cap” sounded nice—and not look at the real motives.  They’ll close the General Election by limiting it to the highest two vote getters in the Primary—not necessarily the parties’ choices.  Ask them “why two?” and you’ll get a blank stare from the Sages—or an honest answer:  because with two, the Sages will get their sort of candidates:  vanilla and vanilla light. 

But there are more than two political parties and more than two ideas about how to solve California’s problems.  Thus, the ideas of most parties will be shut out of the one election that actually generates a lawmaker—the General.  This is particularly pernicious in a public contest of ideas, because the average voter only tunes in before the General, not the Primary.  Thus, most parties’ ideas will be blocked from the public forum at the critical moment.  Worse, in heavily one-party districts—San Francisco, for example—the top two vote getters in the Primary could be from the same party.  So, in the more ideologically monolithic areas there will be even less diversity of opinion.  But, the Sages think they know best, so they don’t need more opinions and views in Sacramento—they need less.  More orthodoxy, less questioning the status quo—yes taxes might have to go up again and government may need to grow even larger, but the sacred budget will be on time!

What do other parties think about this orthodoxy?  The Sages don’t care.  You can kiss the Greens, American Independents, and Peace & Freedom viewpoints good-bye.  What good are their parties with no ability to participate in the actual election?  What good is a Republican candidate trying to run in San Francisco?  The Closed General eliminates their participation.  It stifles their opinions.  It prevents the most diverse state in America from hearing diverse views in the political process.  It forces the Sages’ voice to be the only one that we hear.

The Sages, however, will still let us play in the Primary—the election that doesn’t do any damage to the Sacramento machine.  They know that a candidate could win every primary in their life and never land in Sacramento.  Only the General produces lawmakers who affect the direction, and ideas, of government.

As we saw this week in stark terms, the Sages’ idea is to tax you more, to take more of your property, to undo their mess.  Madison saw this threat for all types of property—including your sacred property:  your ideas, beliefs, and conscience.  The same package of taxes, smoke, and mirrors that brought you Props 1A-F is about to bring you the Closed General initiative—to unlock the ‘gridlock’.  They don’t mention that the ‘gridlock’ might just be slowing an even more voracious Sacramento machine. 

Ultimately, the Sages of Sacramento believe they are smarter than Madison:  less debate, less ideas, less freedom of association is what they seek.  Don’t let them be smarter than you.  Close the doors to the battle of ideas by closing the General Election and you will end up with a bunch of people who make you pay more taxes.  But at least they’ll all agree.
__________________________________

Keith Carlson, an attorney, is Treasurer of the California Republican Party.

You can write to Carlson, via the FR, here.