Should Indiana retain its partially open political primary system (voters required to declare their party affiliation)?

---

Lalita Amos | 07/23/2007 - 22:22 |  Indiana's is a partially open primary system--not an open one

If our primary system were completely open, no one would have to declare anything when they stroll into the polling stations. They would get a primary ballot with every single name on it. My husband is Baha'i and, as such, is forbidden to declare a political party (meaning, he can't participate as a political partisan). He gets to vote for dogcatcher and any open questions. People are, in fact, being disenfranchised. People like me, who are more moderate independents are only given ballots with independent candidates (as if "independent" were a political party).

I just don't know where the ACLU is on this question.

------
Lalita Amos, CRC
Total Team Solutions, LLC
www.totalteamsolutions.com

login or register to post comments

---

Arthur Farnsley | 07/20/2007 - 22:20 |  I've got to read more carefully

Well, I posted about this very subject in Mississippi without even having read this. I'm not sorry because it moves the discussion along, but I do wish I'd been more responsive to what was already there, including Steve's helpful summary.

login or register to post comments

---

Steve Rankin | 07/19/2007 - 17:52 |  Open primaries

Both Mississippi and Virginia have "open primary,
public declaration" systems like Indiana's. On
June 8, in a suit brought by Mississippi Democrats,
a U. S. district judge ruled that state's open primary
law unconstitutional.

A similar suit brought by Virginia Republicans is
now in the 4th U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Last week, a group of Republicans filed a federal
suit against Idaho's open primary law.

I believe that the state-mandated open primary will
ultimately be outlawed.

login or register to post comments