Scott Bruun: Oregon Should Say No to Open Primary

Email to a friend Permalink

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Scott Bruun, GoLocalPDX MINDSETTER™

Isn’t the primary purpose of government to protect and improve the lives of its citizens? You know, like how our federal government defends against foreign threats; how the state of Oregon oversees public education; and how the city of Portland ensures that streets are maintained for our use and comfort? 

Well, two out of three ain’t that bad.

And isn’t it also true that our biggest political debates almost always revolve around how we best go about doing this? How best to protect and improve people’s lives, that is?  

Well, if this is true, then Oregon is best served by saying ‘No’ to Measure 90, the “open primary” ballot measure. 

If passed, Measure 90 would make big changes to Oregon’s electoral process.  It would create a unified primary ballot and allow registered Oregon voters to vote for any candidate regardless of party.  This would replace the current multi-ballot primary system, where Democrats and Republicans vote for their respective party’s candidates exclusively, and where nonaffiliated voters are limited to nonpartisan races and issues.

That’s big change. An ever-bigger change is that the top two vote-getters in a new open primary, regardless of party, would then advance to compete in the general election. 

Backers of Measure 90 suggest, rightly, that primary elections in Oregon have become too bitter and partisan and that these factors have contributed to deterioration in quality of elections and governance in Oregon. Backers further maintain that an open primary may improve our election outcomes by compelling candidates to speak to a broader audience. That it will force candidates to address the “sensible center” and move beyond preaching to the partisan choir. 

And thus, abracadabra, a new crop of less-partisan elected leaders who will find common ground to fix Oregon.

Wish it were that easy. If it were, we would have solved the problem long ago. 

But the open primary idea has a major Achilles’ heel. Namely, it will diminish healthy competition while promoting the growth of political squishiness. 

If we believe that protecting and improving the lives of Oregonians is at least partially accomplished through development of good policy ideas. And if we further believe that those ideas are best vetted in the arena of competition, like a campaign.  Then we should be wary of any process that rewards candidates for simply being noncontroversial.  A process that may reward a candidate for being all things to all people.  In other words, rewarded for being squishy.

In an open primary, where being congenial and “non-partisan” is valued above providing solutions; candidates seeking votes will be tempted to blur differences and mute controversy. When this happens, any real competition of ideas will wither. 

After all, how often will a candidate offer bold or controversial ideas if they are punished for doing so?

Need For Change

Oregon needs more innovative ideas, not fewer. More debate, not less. 

Consider Isabel, my sister-in-law with two young kids in Portland Public Schools. Doesn’t she and her family benefit with more public debate on ideas for school improvement, not less? 

Or consider Rob, the husband of one of my aunts, who’s watched as manufacturing jobs in Oregon, the kind he is trained for, have shrunk.  How does he benefit by any reduction in healthy debate and new ideas for economic prosperity? 

The bottom line is that without healthy debate, debate that includes the advocacy and defense of competing ideas, government will fail Isabel and Rob.  

The Yes On 90 website says passage “will end the extreme partisanship that’s gridlocking government.”

A worthy goal. But at the same time, a goal that is far beyond the bandwidth of a simple ballot measure.

True change in Oregon can only come from transformational leadership, not from milk-toast elections. This requires candidates with courage, new ideas, and yes, the ability to embrace principled compromise. Candidates who can advocate and defend their ideas in the arena of competitive elections. 

Candidates who can demonstrate to Isabel, to Rob, to Oregon, how their plan - not their personality - will best protect and improve our lives. 

Transformational leadership is rare, and we’ve certainly seen too little of it in Oregon. But it does exist, it is out there.

And while we will never find it via ballot measure, Measure 90 or any other, we can find it if we’re willing to seek out and support Oregon’s best candidates.

Scott Bruun is a fifth-generation Oregonian and recovering politician. He lives with his family in the 'burbs, yet dutifully commutes to Portland every day where he earns his living on the fifth floor of Big Pink.

Related Articles

• Scott Bruun: Does Portland Really Want Your Business?
• Is Wehby the Last, Best Hope for Oregon GOP?
• What If Oregon Elected Dennis Richardson?
• Why Republican Bruce Starr is Out of Step With his Voters
• Why the Portland Street Fee Is A Bad Idea

Enjoy this post? Share it with others.

Email to a friend Permalink