From Ballotpedia

Jump to: navigation, search

An open primary is any primary election in which a voter either does not take to formally affiliate with a political political party in order to vote in its primary or can declare his or her affiliation with a party at the polls on the day of the principal even if the voter was previously affiliated with a dissimilar party.[1] [2]

HIGHLIGHTS

  • In 21 states, at least one political party conducts open primaries for congressional and state-level offices.

  • For information on voter participation rules for the 2020 presidential primaries and caucuses, beneath.

    • Top-ii chief systems, such as those utilized in California and Washington, are sometimes classified as open up primary systems because voter participation in such primaries is not tied to partisan affiliation. For the purposes of this article, a top-two principal is considered a separate entity. For more data most top-two primaries, see this article.

    Usage

    Congressional and state-level elections

    In 21 states, at least ane political party conducts open primaries for congressional and state-level offices. The map below identifies states in which at least ane political party utilizes open primaries for congressional and state-level elections. Hover over a state for additional details.[one]

    States in which at least one political party utilizes open primaries for congressional and land-level elections
    Country Open primaries Notes
    Alabama Yes In Alabama, a voter may participate in any party's chief by declaring his or her preference for that party at the polls on the day of the master election.[iii]
    Arkansas Yes N/A
    Georgia Yes Northward/A
    Hawaii Aye North/A
    Illinois Yes A voter must publicly state his or her affiliation at the polling place in order to vote in a political party'southward primary.[iv]
    Indiana Yes Department 3-10-1-half-dozen of the Indiana Code stipulates that, in order to participate in a party'southward master, a voter must have either voted for a majority of that party'due south nominees in the last full general election or must intend to vote for a majority of the party'southward nominees in the upcoming full general election. Co-ordinate to FairVote, which classifies Indiana every bit an open primary state, this provision of the law is unenforceable due to the nature of cloak-and-dagger balloting.[5]
    Iowa Yes Department 43.38 of the Iowa Code stipulates that only registered party members can vote in a party's primary. Section 43.42 of the Iowa Code stipulates that a voter may change his or her party affiliation at the polls on primary ballot mean solar day and vote in the primary of a political party other than the one to which he or she formerly belonged.[6]
    Michigan Yes N/A
    Minnesota Yeah N/A
    Mississippi Yep Due north/A
    Missouri Yes North/A
    Montana Yes N/A
    North Dakota Yep N/A
    Ohio Aye According to FairVote, a voter tin can "choose a party affiliation on the day of the election." If a voter has previously participated in another party's principal, he or she tin can complete a statement at the polling place on the twenty-four hour period of the election affirming that the voter is changing his or her partisan affiliation.[1]
    South Carolina Yes N/A
    Tennessee Yes Section 2-7-115 of the Tennessee Code stipulates that a voter must either be registered with a political political party or must declare his or her amalgamation with the party at the polls on primary ballot mean solar day in society to vote in that political party's primary.[7]
    Texas Aye N/A
    Vermont Yes Northward/A
    Virginia Yes N/A
    Wisconsin Yes Due north/A
    Wyoming Yes A voter must be affiliated with a political party in order to participate in its principal ballot. Any voter, regardless of previous partisan affiliation, may change his or her affiliation on the day of the primary.[8]

    Presidential primaries and caucuses

    2020 presidential primaries and caucuses

    The maps below detail voter participation rules for the Democratic and Republican parties in the 2020 presidential nominating process. Hover over a land to see boosted information. Please notation that this information is tentative and subject to alter.

    For information from previous presidential election cycles, click "[Show more]" below.

    Evidence more than

    2016 presidential primaries and caucuses

    In the 2016 presidential election bike, political parties in 22 states utilized open up primaries and/or caucuses as function of the presidential nominating procedure. The map below identifies states in which at least 1 political party utilized open primaries or caucuses as role of the presidential nominating process in 2016. Hover over a land for additional details.

    States in which at least one political party utilized open primaries or caucuses for presidential nominating process, 2016
    State Open primaries or caucuses
    Alabama Yeah
    Arkansas Yes
    California Yeah (Democrats, American Independents, and Libertarians)
    Georgia Yes
    Idaho Aye (Democrats)
    Illinois Aye
    Indiana Yes
    Michigan Yes
    Minnesota Yeah
    Mississippi Yes
    Missouri Yes
    Montana Yes
    North Dakota Yes
    Ohio Yes
    South Carolina Yeah
    Tennessee Yep
    Texas Yes
    Utah Aye (Democrats)
    Vermont Yeah
    Virginia Yes
    Washington Yes (Democrats)
    Wisconsin Yes

    Support and opposition

    Support

    In a 2014 article, the editorial board of USA Today argued that open up primaries can produce more moderate full general election candidates:[ix]

    " As a full general rule, anything that the far right and the far left both decry is a decent thought. And so it is with open up primaries. While they can be the subject of muddied tricks, they are more likely to produce candidates who are moderate plenty to win in general elections and be more effective in office. The very people who cross over are oft the very people a political party most needs to attract.[10] "
    —United states of america Today

    John Opdycke, in a 2017 opinion slice for The Hill, suggested that open primaries are an effective counter to partisan gridlock:[11]

    " Open primaries bring people together and enforces accountability. They create new opportunities to work together, form innovative coalitions and fence issues on the merits. That'southward why open primaries are so relevant correct now and why activists in Florida, Idaho and many more states are working hard to bear on on local laws and on the rules for our next presidential primary in 2020. As long every bit our system of elections incentivizes politicians to play to their partisan base, Washington won't change. It will continue to get worse.[ten] "
    —John Opdycke

    In a 2016 opinion piece for The Orlando Sentinel, columnist Beth Kassab argued that airtight primaries disenfranchise voters and that open primaries are an constructive remedy to this issue:[12]

    " [There are] 3.ii one thousand thousand voters in Florida who are barred from having a say in Tuesday's presidential main because they aren't registered with ane of the two major political parties. Recollect about that. More than than a quarter of the state's voters are left out. They will be forced to sit on the sidelines — completely disenfranchised — during ane of the most contentious primaries in recent history.[10] "
    —Beth Kassab

    Opposition

    Andrew Gripp, in a 2016 piece for the Independent Voter Network, argued that forcing political parties to open up their primaries to unaffiliated voters infringes upon the associational rights of the parties:[13]

    " Citizens should non impose on parties their supposed right to help determine the parties' nominees because it [...] violates these private groups' freedom of clan. A caveat: this is not to say that parties should not be encouraged to open up their internal elections to non-members; indeed, it may be in their interest to do so. Simply this is an option that should be left to the parties themselves and non to be effected through state force.[10] "
    —Andrew Gripp

    Bill Armistead, chairman of the Republican Party of Alabama, suggested in an interview with The Washington Times that open up primaries enable members of opposing political parties to sabotage the nominating processes of those parties:[14]

    " The Mississippi master shows what can happen when you have an open main. Well-nigh often information technology is for mischief. The Democrats who vote in our chief either want to support the weaker candidate so they will have a meliorate shot at winning in the full general election, or they have been coerced into voting in our party'southward primary to elect a candidate more closely aligned with their party's views and philosophy.[10] "
    —Bill Armistead

    Bob Cesca, in a 2016 slice for The Daily Banter, made an statement similar to Armistead's:[15]

    " Frankly, at that place shouldn't be any open primaries in the first identify. Basic logic dictates that members of the Democratic Party should be exclusively tasked with choosing the Autonomous Party nominee for president, too as congressional offices and and so forth. Second, it'south a huge mistake for the Democrats to unilaterally brand a change like this since it'd get out the process completely and lopsidedly vulnerable to Republican tampering[.][10] "
    —Bob Cesca

    Recent legislation

    The map beneath identifies states in which legislation related to the conduct of principal elections has been introduced. Hover over a country to see the precise number of relevant bills introduced in that state. A darker shade of red indicates a greater number of relevant bills. In those states shaded in white, relevant bills have non been introduced. For state-specific details, click a state in the map below or select a state from the drop-down bill of fare beneath the map (states shaded in white cannot exist selected). A list of state legislation will brandish, including data about pecker status and links to total text. This information is provided by BillTrack50.com. To return to the map, click "Back" in the upper righthand corner of the legislation list.

    See below for a complete list of primary systems bills. To learn more than about a particular bill, click its title. This information is provided by BillTrack50 and LegiScan.

    See also

    • Main election
    • Closed primary
    • Semi-closed primary
    • Blanket primary
    • Top-ii master

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.0 i.1 1.2 FairVote, "Who Can Vote in Congressional Primaries," accessed August 17, 2017
    2. ↑ National Conference of State Legislatures, "State Main Election Types," July 21, 2016
    3. ↑ Alabama Secretary of Land, "Frequently Asked Questions," accessed November twenty, 2019
    4. ↑ Illinois Compiled Statutes, "Affiliate 10 ILCS 5/, Commodity vii, Section 43," accessed September 12, 2017
    5. ↑ Indiana Code, 'Section 3-x-one-half dozen," accessed September 12, 2017
    6. ↑ Iowa Code, "Sections 43.38 and 43.42," accessed September 12, 2017
    7. ↑ Tennessee Code, "Section 2-vii-115," accessed September 12, 2017
    8. ↑ Wyoming Statutes, "Section 22-5-212," accessed September 12, 2017
    9. ↑ USA Today, "Open primaries produce viable candidates: Our view," July 1, 2014
    10. ↑ ten.0 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 Annotation: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    11. ↑ The Hill, "Desire to fix American politics? Open upwards the primaries," June 27, 2017
    12. ↑ The Orlando Lookout man, "It's time for open primaries in Florida," March 15, 2016
    13. ↑ Independent Voter Network, "An Independent's Case against Open Primaries," May four, 2016
    14. ↑ The Washington Times, "Aroused Republican leaders set up to shut door on open primaries," Baronial half-dozen, 2014
    15. ↑ The Baily Banter, "Open up Primaries Are a Terrible Idea, Particularly Knowing the GOP is Moving Toward Closed Primaries," May 25, 2016

    v•e

    Ballotpedia
    About

    Overview • What people are proverb • Back up Ballotpedia • Contact • Contribute • Job opportunities

    Executive: Leslie Graves, President • Gwen Beattie, Main Operating Officer • Ken Carbullido, Vice President of Election Product and Technology Strategy

    Communications: Kayla Harris • Megan Brownish • Sarah Groat • Lauren Nemerovski
    External Relations: Alison Prange • Sara Key • Kari Berger • Hannah Nelson
    Operations: Meghann Olshefski • Lauren Dixon • Kelly Rindfleisch
    Policy: Christopher Nelson • Caitlin Styrsky • Molly Byrne • Katharine Frey • Jimmy McAllister
    Tech: Matt Latourelle, Tech Director • Nathan Bingham • Ryan Burch • Michael Cella • Kirsten Corrao • Margaret Kearney

    Contributors: Scott Rasmussen
    Editorial

    Geoff Pallay, Editor-in-Chief • Daniel Anderson, Managing Editor • Josh Altic, Managing Editor • Ryan Byrne, Managing Editor • Cory Eucalitto, Managing Editor • Mandy Gillip, Managing Editor • Jerrick Adams • Victoria Antram • Dave Beaudoin • Jaclyn Beran • Marielle Bricker • Kate Carsella • Kelly Coyle • Megan Feeney • Juan García de Paredes • Sara Horton • Tyler King • Doug Kronaizl • Amee LaTour • David Luchs • Brittony Maag • Andrew McNair • Jackie Mitchell • Elisabeth Moore • Ellen Morrissey • Mackenzie Murphy • Samantha Postal service • Paul Rader • Ethan Rice • Myj Saintyl • Maddie Sinclair Johnson • Abbey Smith • Janie Valentine • Caitlin Vanden Nail • Joel Williams • Samuel Wonacott • Mercedes Yanora

    ‎