I am writing a page about the Top Four Primary model for VotersTakeCharge.us (not yet up). Voters Take Charge will advocate for proportional representation and replacing plurality voting. My problem is that I am a voting system salesperson, not an election scientist. I need help.
The Alaskan top four nonpartisan “primary” model is supported by has several organizations, including Unite America, The Institute for Political Innovation, Veterans for All Voters, Independent Voter Project, Open Primaries, and Fair Vote.
They have money, enough for ballot initiatives. This is the main reason why this topic is worthy of consideration in this forum.
There are several questions to be considered. Should I separate this into two topics as follows?
Topic 1
Alaskan Top Four Model Improvements:
What voting systems should be used for each round?
Is it a useful model? (setting aside the partisan - nonpartisan question)
Topic 2
Alaskan Top Four Model - Partisan vs nonpartisan:
iEBs - independent Egotistical Billionaires?
State run primaries?
As you likely recall, Top Four is a two-round system. Anyone can get on the Round One ballot by gathering signatures. Each voter can choose one candidate in round one, the top four meet in a Ranked Choice Vote final.
I am reluctant to call round one a primary, as parties cannot choose their candidates in round one. As a nonpartisan election, there is no mention of party nominations on the ballots in either round. Instead, each candidate’s party affiliation is listed. Thus, the round one ballot for the 2022 Alaskan race for the US Senate listed eight Republicans, three Democrats, three nonpartisans, two undeclared and one Alaskan Independent. Could this be a clone problem?
The two round concept has appeal. Everyone competes in the first round, giving third parties and unaffiliated candidates an opportunity to make their cases. Dedicated voters would narrow the general election field to four (or five) candidates.
Nonpartisan ballots harm third-parties by denying much needed visibility at a critical point. Major parties must communicate who their nominee is and persuade supporters to ignore the other members of their party who are in the race.
Who benefits? Unaffiliated candidates, chiefly ones with money. Are they trying to set up a stealth party of iEBs (independent Egotistical Billionaires)?
My key questions are what would be the best voting systems for rounds one and two? Would clones cause problems? Also interested in members’ opinions on the two round, top four (or five) concept.
More opportunities to express opinions! Should there be state-run primaries held before round one? Should we offer each party four options: open, semi-open, closed and do it yourself? Or should we demand proportional representation before we are so nice to the parties? Partisan vs nonpartisan in general?
Please feel free to express your righteous indignation. Thank you, GregW