Political Parties are private clubs. Primaries are taxpayer-funded elections where private clubs choose their representation in General Elections. So, members of Party A pay for Party B to choose their candidate and those not affiliated with any Party pay for them all. Instead of passing a taxpayer-funded Constitutional Amendment to force private clubs to allow non-members to vote in their internal selection process, why not adopt a system where the private clubs pay for their own processes? [More]
WarOnGuns Correspondent Scott Jensen offer an idea I’ve never considered before, and while addressed to Oklahoma legislators in response to SQ 835 seems universally applicable.
I’ve pointed out a failing of open primaries before and don’t see either party getting their snouts out of the public trough without powerful carrot/stick incentives, but Scott’s ideas are unique and deserves wider consideration.
I’m intrigued. What about you?
The selection of candidates was forced out of those “smoke filled rooms” and into the “light of day” primaries by the same folks who want to turn the Republic into a democracy. Yet when push came to shove, Princess Nancy declared that Willie Brown’s former mistress had won a primary open to only the party big-wigs. IOW, you can rest assured they’ll continue to tinker with the system until it gives them the results they want (demand?) whether the voters agree with them or not.
Yet, at the end of the day……
When democracy becomes tyranny, I still get to vote!” — Mike Vanderboegh