According to CalMatters Housing, California's political establishment on both sides of the aisle is taking another swing at the state's open primary system. Back in 2010, voters approved Proposition 14, which opened up primary elections to independent voters and allowed everyone to support any candidate they wanted, regardless of party affiliation. Both Republicans and Democrats opposed it then because an open primary system gives the parties less control over who gets to run and who wins. They lost that fight at the ballot box, but now there's a new measure being pushed to return California to closed primaries.
The fresh argument for repealing the top-two primary came up during the recent gubernatorial race. There was a moment when people worried that two Republican candidates might end up as the top two finishers, which in a heavily Democratic state would have guaranteed a Republican governor in November. While that concern turned out to be unfounded and we got the typical result of one Democrat and one Republican on the ballot, it gave opponents of the open primary new ammunition to push their repeal measure.
What caught my attention from the CalMatters piece is how the attorney general's description of this repeal measure glosses over the real impact. The summary doesn't plainly explain that roughly 5.3 million Californians registered without a party would lose their ability to vote in primary elections if this measure passes. It doesn't mention that many voters would suddenly be limited to only candidates their own party has already vetted. The authors of this piece argue the attorney general should be crystal clear about what voters would actually be giving up.
This fight isn't unique to California either. According to the reporting, similar battles are happening in other states like Alaska and New York, where different political movements on opposite ends of the spectrum are trying to close down or open up primary access. The common thread everywhere is the same: organizations want to keep primaries restricted to their own party members.
What I am seeing locally in the Bay Area and East Bay is that independent and unaffiliated voters keep growing as a share of our population, and they care deeply about having a real voice in elections. When systems change to limit who can participate in choosing candidates, it affects the kinds of people who end up on our ballots and ultimately represent our communities. This is a dynamic worth paying attention to, whether you're a buyer, seller, or just someone invested in how our region develops.
