Re: Move to North Dakota if you really want a secret ballot, or ....

From: Douglas W. Jones <jones_at_cs_dot_uiowa_dot_edu>
Date: Thu Aug 05 2004 - 11:58:25 CDT

On Aug 5, 2004, at 11:32 AM, Arthur Keller wrote:

> As you may know, the issue of open vs. closed primary is very much an
> unsettled issue here is California,

I have a brother in law who had an interesting comment on this
issue. He said that one of the worst things we could do is
have all the states run their party systems identically. If
all states relied on party caucuses, or if all states relied
on open primaries, or if all states relied on ... you name it.

His reason was twofold: We want to keep exploring alternatives
to see if there's something better we haven't tried, and
we want candidates for the presidency to have to pass a variety
of tests. Caucus systems test whether the candidate can appeal
to the party insiders, while open primaries -- beauty contests,
as some have called them, test whether the candidate can
appeal to the electorate at large. It takes both to win, so
why not make sure we have a national legislature made up of
people selected via differing mechanisms, each having passed the
tests imposed in their state, and why not demand that our
president pass both kinds of tests.

                Doug Jones
                jones@cs.uiowa.edu
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Tue Aug 31 23:17:03 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Aug 31 2004 - 23:17:22 CDT