California's Moderate Republican Party?
Supporters touted California's newly adopted top-two voting system as the only way for moderates to overcome the ideologues that dominate the Republican and Democratic parties. That argument would have more weight if it weren't for the curious case of Abel Maldonado.
Richard Winger of Ballot Access News argues that the results of last Tuesday's Republican primaries in California proved that supporters oversold the case for the top-two election system voters adopted:
In a related vein, supporters of Proposition 14 said during the campaign, over and over, that Republican primaries in California always result in victories for extreme conservatives. However, in all the contested Republican statewide primaries this year, with a semi-closed system, the more conservative candidate (among those who had big campaigns) lost in each instance. Steve Poizner lost for Governor, Sam Aanestad lost for Lieutenant Governor, Orly Taitz lost for Secretary of State, Tom Harman lost for Attorney General, and Chuck Devore lost for U.S. Senator.
You could quibble with some of Winger's examples. While DeVore was a Tea Party favorite, Carly Fiorina definitely ran as a conservative too. Taitz is an anti-Obama conspiracy theorist, but does that really make her a conservative?
Still, I think that the point here is pretty strong: Moderates clearly can win Republican primaries in California, even in a year when conservatives are especially motivated. The really striking example is the race for lieutenant governor. Abel Maldonado won the nomination despite voting for the budget that raised taxes in 2009 -- the one California conservatives despised. He is a Schwarzenegger moderate by any reasonable definition.
As one of Winger's commenters points out, the irony is that Maldonado was the one that pushed for putting top-two on the ballot as part of last year's budget deal. The cynical view was that Maldonado was just doing that so that he could run statewide and win. But, as it turned out, he didn't need top-two to prevail in a Republican primary.
Clearly, ideology wasn't the dominant factor in who Republicans nominated in California. Money was. All of the conservative candidates Winger mentions were badly outspent. That's the crucial reason that they lost.
Given that, there's a case that another measure on California's ballot would more directly have attacked what is wrong with the state's elections than top-two. That measure, Prop. 15, would have set up an experiment in public funding of campaigns for races for secretary of state. It lost by a wide margin.
Of course, it's both unsurprising and understandable that, at a time when California is enduring a historically bad fiscal crisis, voters wouldn't be enthusiastic about spending money funding political candidates.
We invite you to discuss and comment on this article using social media.
The Week in Public Finance: The Trump Budget Edition4 hours ago
How Trump's Health Budget Would Impact States13 hours ago
Kevyn Orr on the New Orleans Mayor: 'I Have Rarely, If Ever, Heard a White Guy Speak With Such Passion' About Race14 hours ago
New Study Identifies the Best Cities for Good Government14 hours ago
CBO: House Bill Would Leave 23 Million More Uninsured and Destabilize the Market in Some States17 hours ago
Marijuana Legalization Vetoed, But Vermont Governor Signals a Future Deal17 hours ago