John Wildermuth, a California journalist, has looked into financing for the campaign to pass Proposition 14, the “top-two” measure. He says that the California Hospital Association actually donated $500,000 to the campaign in favor of the measure. The CHA gave $250,000 directly, and another $250,000 to Governor Schwarzenegger’s fund for ballot measures. Then that second payment was funneled into the pro-14 campaign. See this story. The story has a link to the “stop top two” web page set up by Christina Tobin, and says this web page is just about the only organized activity against Prop. 14.
Ballot Access News
Edited By Richard Winger
The special interest groups who want to get special benifits from the government sure are lining up to get Proposition 14 passed.
Yeah, it’s a conspiracy by the monied interests to prevent the latrine fly parties from putting their almost universally ignored candidates on the ballot for the general election. 🙂
If you correct your myopia, you can see that successful new parties appear on a regular basis in Europe. This is due to PR. About 17 states allow for amending the state constitution by initiative and referendum. Attempt to change state constitutions to elect state and local legislatures by PR and you can create viable non-duopoly parties. You might even be able to get major funding for such a campaign-people who have money don’t comprise a solid unified bloc.
Legislative candidates of the Peace & Freedom Party in California in November 2008 received these results: (1) State Senate 9th district, Marsha Feinland 7.66%; (2) Assembly 5, Karen Martinez, 7.61%; Assembly 9, Gerald Frink, 6.13%; Assembly 48, Lucilla Esguerra, 12.92%.
All these races were in districts with both a Democrat and a Republican as well, except for the Assembly 48th race.
The 20 legislative candidates of the Libertarian Party in California received in November 2008 an average of 5.92% for State Senate and an average for Assembly of 6.87%. All 20 were in races with both a Dem and a Rep. The best showing was Pamela J. Brown, Assembly 40th district (San Fernando Valley), 14.76% in a race with also a Dem and a Rep. If she had increased her showing by a factor of two and one-half, she would have won.
P.R. = Total Votes / Total Seats = EQUAL votes for each seat winner — via pre-election candidate rank order lists to transfer surplus and loser votes to any candidate in ANY district.
Assembly 100 percent / 80 = X percent.
Senate 100 percent / 40 = Z percent.
Solve for X and Z. High tech algebra P.R. math.
———-
Iraq election math just reported —
http://www.ihec.iq/English/press_releases.aspx?id=2378
Translation from Arabic.
Count the mere 6,292 candidates and 86 parties / independents in the various Iraqi provinces.
#3 In the 1998 election, there were 5 P&F candidates for the Assembly. They received the following percentage of the votes, in the primary and the general election:
1st AD: 6.28%, 4.62%
6th AD: 2.29%, 2.17%
7th AD: 1.23%, 1.37%
41st AD: 4.17%, 2.65%
42nd AD: 6.17%, 3.97%
You have 3 districts (1st, 41st, 42st)where the P&F share of the vote declined by between 26% and 36% from the primary to the general election. In these 3 districts, there were no actual primary contests. Voters could vote for the same candidates in both elections (a Democrat, a Republican, and a P&F candidate).
How would you explain the decline? (1) Idea-oriented showed up for the June primary, while the November general was dominated by personalities? (2) Voters were freer to vote their true preference in the primary. In the general election, they were concerned about wasting their vote.
I vote for two. But perhaps voters are more interested in ideas in the spring. Or maybe P&F voters are more likely to vote in the primary.
In the two districts where the P&F vote was virtually unchanged between the two elections, there were contests for other nominations (3 Republicans in the 6th, 4 Democrats and 2 Republicans in the 7th). Perhaps some of the P&F not-so-faithful voted in those races.
The dissemination of ideas is best done by candidates for high-profile races like President, Governor, and U.S. Senator, especially when the debates are inclusive. The biggest boost the Green Party in California got was when Peter Camejo was in the 2002 general election debate Bill Simon. Until then, voters didn’t know anything about Peter Camejo. They were startled to learn that this Green Party candidate for Governor was a very sophisticated and successful finance planner, who seemed to know more about budget and finance issues than anyone would have guessed. That is why Camejo did so well in November 2002, hitting 15.5% in San Francisco and 16.6% in Mendocino County, and over 5% statewide. That is why Camejo was the only minor party candidate invited into all the 2003 gubernatorial debates.
Under Prop. 14, a candidate like Camejo would not be able to run in November and would be obviously excluded from any general election season debates. As to primary season debates, except in Minnesota, I have never heard of minor party or independent candidates being invited into primary season debates.
If Camejo was invited to the 2003 recall-gubernatorial debate, when there were 90(?) candidates, why wouldn’t he (were he still living) be invited to a debate in June 2014 when there might be only 10 to 20 candidates running? Schwarzenegger skipped the first debate in 2003. And Camejo was the only Green Party candidate who was invited.
Why should the voters have been denied the opportunity to compare Richard Riordan to Peter Camejo in 2002? And in 2002 Gray Davis refused to debate Camejo, and would only debate Bill Simon if Camejo was prevented from attending (he had been invited to be the guest of Simon) and the debate was held in a newspaper office.
If this year’s gubernatorial election were under Top 2, you don’t think there would be an attempt to organize a debate between at least Jerry Brown, Meg Whitman, and Steve Poizner before the primary? That is, it would be among candidates that whoever was trying to organize the debate regarded as major contenders. There would probably also be some all comers debates, which some candidates might decline to attend.
So I don’t see that an Open Primary would have that much impact on which candidates would attend a debate.
I do think that debates before the primary would not be one party debates.
How much attention will the 3rd – 5th plus place persons in the primary get from the top 2 folks ??? Duh.
#8 in the 2003 recall election there were 5 candidates in both debates. 6 had been invited to the first debate, but Arnold Schwarzenegger did not participate. He did participate in the second debate, but by then Peter Ueberroth had withdrawn.