Keeping the Republican Party Republican
Saying no to party crashers
By Rohit Joy
From the May 2007 Print Edition
What’s the difference between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party? Most people would mention issues such as taxes, immigration, or moral values. However, beyond the halls of the Capitol and deep within the smoke-filled rooms of the two parties, an additional area of disagreement has surfaced of late: the question of whether decline-to-state voters should be permitted to vote in direct primary elections for presidential candidates.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in California Democratic Party v. Jones that California’s blanket primary law in force at the time, which allowed members to vote for candidates from any party regardless of registration, violated political parties’ First Amendment right to free association. Parties have been able to determine their own rules of procedure superseding state election laws ever since this decision was promulgated in 2000. The California Democratic Party has chosen to allow DTS voters to vote in all primary elections. The California Republican Party, on the other hand, restricts presidential primaries to Republicans but permits independents to vote in primaries for other officers.
A few state Republican leaders have expressed support for changing the rules to include DTS voters in presidential primaries, most notably Republican National Committeeman Tim Morgan and Immediate Past Chairman Duf Sundheim. Morgan has stated that he is “concerned about not building into the general election a whole block of voters, that by [the current] rule, we’ve isolated.” Although the Republican National Committee reduces by 50 percent the number of delegates from any state that changes its delegate selection procedure after September 4, 2007, a rules change may nevertheless be brought up during the Fall CRP Convention on September 9 on the grounds that the change is not “material” and thus rendering any penalty inapplicable.
Supporters of the change argue that excluding DTS voters from the Republican primary when Democrats include them could cause independent primary voters to commit to Democratic candidates, making such voters unlikely to switch to a Republican ticket in the general election. Having made a commitment at the primaries, independents would be more likely to re-register as Democrats. In this light, the Republican Party should change its rules to remain competitive with Democrats.
But not all top officials agree that the change is beneficial. Former CRP Chairman and candidate for national committeeman Shawn Steel and current National Committeewoman Barbara Alby, along with Southern Vice Chairman Jon Fleischman, oppose the proposal, arguing that the Republican presidential nominee should be selected exclusively by Republican voters. In addition, since national convention delegates draft and adopt the RNC platform, allowing DTS voters to influence the selection of delegates could result in a platform less consistent with Republican principles.
While proponents have some legitimate arguments for wanting to change the rules, there are many ways such a move could also hurt the Republican Party. Republican registration could fall since the exclusive ability to select the Republican nominee would no longer be an incentive for voters to register Republican. Empirical evidence shows Republican registration in California held steady over the past ten years while Democrats lost 20 percent of their registered voters.
It is not even clear that the current rule allowing DTS voters to participate in statewide and legislative primaries is beneficial for the Republican cause. In safe Republican seats, many independents choose the Republican ballot in the primary since they know whoever wins will ultimately be elected.
It is reasonable to assume that DTS voters as a group are less conservative than Republicans, giving liberal Republicans more of an advantage than they would have if the vote were restricted to Republicans. Senator Tom Harman’s victory over the more conservative Diane Harkey in the 35th Senate District in the 2006 primary, for instance, may largely be attributable to DTS voter participation since his margin of victory was only 0.24 percent.
In addition, independents are less likely to have an in-depth understanding of the records of the various Republican candidates than registered Republicans. Since independents are less familiar with each candidate’s history, they are more likely to vote for candidates who have raised the most money and attained the best name recognition, than for those whose policy positions are the most philosophically sound or whose leadership skills are the best. Ultimately, this would result in moneyed interests gaining more control over the political process at the expense of grassroots conservative activists.
Many of the problems currently plaguing our state and nation can be traced to influence by special interests. For example, politicians largely tolerate illegal immigration because they depend on contributions from industries like agribusiness and construction that thrive on employing illegal aliens. Public education is another such issue; teacher’s unions make large financial contributions to Democratic candidates and thwart needed reforms such as school choice. In light of these issues, delegates to the convention this fall should avoid undermining the power of party activists in elections and vote down any proposal that extends the privilege of choosing the Republican presidential nominee to DTS voters.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider supporting the Patriot