This weekend I had the opportunity to hear Michael Adams, KY Secretary of State, discuss his position on Open Primaries and Ranked Choice Voting (RCV). Unfortunately, his positions clearly reflect his loyalty to the Republican Party and not the people of Kentucky.  This is common in states where one party has a stronghold in the legislature, whether Democrat or Republican.  Opposition to RCV is bipartisan.

OPEN PRIMARIES

Sec. Adams discussed two types of “open primaries”.  One type allows every voter to choose which primary to cast their vote on the day of the election.  The other he discusses is similar, by allowing voters registered as independent to choose a party on the day of the primary.  He believes that this type of primary “could” lead to extremism.  (Yes, he said this with a straight face.) 

This inability to see American (and Kentucky) politics outside of the party duopoly is deeply entrenched in our election systems.  Many Republican and Democrat leaders are unwilling to let go of their singular power by opening our elections to new parties and new candidates.  Just as election reform is a bipartisan issue, so is keeping the status quo.  Primaries are one way to keep those outside of the parties out of the game.

Yet, a better version of an “open primary” can open the door to our smaller political parties and independent candidates.  Often called a jungle primary, in this election all candidates face each other in the primary regardless of political party with the top two winners moving on to the General Election.  This would allow all voters the opportunity to choose the candidates, significant in Kentucky where half of our general election races in 2022 were unopposed. 

Critics of this type of system are concerned because two parties of the same candidate could end up on the general election ballot.  Party leaders are more concerned with maintaining their power than listening to the voters will.  Vote splitting between candidates of the same party is also an issue since this is a first-past-the-post contest.  Some also believe this puts candidates without big party money at a disadvantage, although better some opportunity than none, as with our current system.

Open Primaries are still a step in the right direction.  Taxpayers are no longer forced to pay for exclusionary primary elections for the two parties, while other parties and independent candidates can easily join the contest.  This alone gives voters more say in who will represent them than our current election system allows.  But this is only one step.  There are better options with Ranked Choice Voting.