While my friend Bob Ellis and I usually agree on most things political, I was chagrined to see him pen a piece that seems out of character for someone as clear thinking and anti-establishment as him. In his article concerning the ballot measure on Open Primaries, I’m afraid we have differing views.
From the title of his article it is clear that the often-misplaced rule of “guilty by association” is in effect. While looking back at the author of measures and initiatives should certainly make one more closely investigate the contents, it shouldn’t discount clear and reasonable examination of the issue. As reasonable individuals we ought to be willing to recognize that the enemy of my enemy is not always my friend. In other words, accountability for the Republican party may come from places you don’t expect and wouldn’t necessarily side with, but that makes it neither bad nor unnecessary.
I am an independent. I have strong conservative beliefs and will defend the Reagan/Buckley brand of Republicans at every opportunity. I regularly vote Republican in most elections (except, of course, primaries where I am not allowed). Unlike Bob, however, I will not defend the Republican Party in South Dakota, nor will I agree with a continuation of its unabated corruption and disregard for the tenets of democracy.
Primary elections have been around since the early part of the 20th century. Before that the candidates were simply chosen by the parties and taken straight to the general election, but voters wanted a say in the process and primary elections were adopted across the country. In South Dakota, we have regressed to the point where elections are once again largely pre-determined by the party, dissent is squelched, and the proverbial smoke filled rooms determine the agenda, the players, and the outcome.
For a number of the beleaguered Democrats in this state, this measure may bring them hope of some opportunity to return to power, but I think this is completely mistaken. This is not an opportunity for Democrats to invade Republican primaries, it is a chance to do away with party control and labels and simply deal in the realm of ideas for a change. In the arena of ideas, conservatives always win. It is not hard to see that being a Republican in South Dakota doesn’t mean much anymore. I have to commend the Democrats for having the conviction to at least admit that they’re leftists instead of hiding behind the party that they think will get them elected, regardless of true ideology.
As well, the fear of party shenanigans in this format of open primary is simply not backed up by history. In instances where things like that have occurred, it has been in partisan primaries where the other party is free to participate, not in a truly open primary like the one proposed.
My call to conservatives who are as fed up with party politics as I am, is to approach this measure with reason and an eye to the future of this state. Let us take a step forward in returning power back into the hands of the voters and out of the clutches of party politics.
*** Nick Reid *** Friend and (normally) conservative advocate
Editors note: While my friend, Nick Reid and I usually agree on most things political, I was chagrined to see him pen a piece that seems out of character for someone as clear thinking and anti-establishment as him.
I just wanted to address one point in your article (that wasn’t already covered in my own).
I don’t defend the South Dakota GOP. As it is run, it is a thoroughly corrupt den of vipers, and desperately needs to be reformed. It cannot be reformed by allowing people who don’t believe in the documented principles of the Republican Party (or even loathe those principles, as Democrats do) to corrupt it even further.
I do, however,defend the South Dakota Republican Party as it is defined in the GOP platform. As the GOP platform makes clear, the South Dakota Republican party is SUPPOSED to stand for the conservative principles and values we have always know it to stand for.
Those values and principles are not served by allowing Democrats and “moderates” and people who can’t align themselves with those values to vote in the GOP primary that selects which Republicans will go against Democrats in the general election. That would only further dilute and liberalize the GOP by allowing out-of-the-closet liberals to affect the choice of candidates (it’s bad enough with the in-the-closet liberals).
If someone can’t agree with Republican principles enough to register as a Republican, they have no business choosing the Republicans who will run in the general election.
Bob,
The measure on the ballot is not at all a traditional open primary. It is instead the dreaded Top 2. Democrats will not be picking the GOP’s candidate. It is one primary for ALL candidates in all parties. The top 2 vote getters then go on to the general. I am totally against it as everywhere it has been implemented, it wipes out 3rd party and Independent candidates from being able to get into the general election. Don’t kid yourself, if this passes it will be disastrous for all other voices. We could end up with 2 establishment Republican candidates in every race come the general election. Why the Democrat Party thought this measure would be a good idea, I don’t know. Maybe their understanding was of a traditional open primary, who knows, but if people read the measure it is Top 2 which wiped out alternative choices in CA.
My question is, when is the last time an independent won any state office? How will this hurt a situation that is already without discernable merit? The parties on either side strangle anyone who doesn’t bow to the establishment. This measure would give independents an actual opportunity to be heard without the party apparatus and label to contend with. The “dreaded top 2” is the only way an independent candidate and independent voters will ever be heard in a meaningful way.
Actually, Top Two helps third parties.
This quote from the Libertarian Party of Washington state, Michael Pickens, says it all: “The bottom line is third parties have to go to work,” he said. “If we can’t get second place in a primary, we’re never going to be able to get first place in the general.”
http://ivn.us/2016/01/29/wa-libertarian-chair-top-two-primary-better-without/