Texas House Bill would create closed primaries

by Vince Leibowitz of of Capitol Annex

A bill by State Rep. John Davis (R-Clear Lake) would create “closed primaries” in Texas, meaning that voters must indicate a party affiliation in advance of participating in primary elections and in order to take part in any party activities, such as precinct conventions.

Although more than states and the District of Columbia have closed primaries, Davis’ bill is clearly aimed to cut Texas Democrats off at the knees after an election cycle in which primary participation exceeded two million and at a time when the party is on the rise statewide after 2008’s record turnout.

The bill, HB 1821, would require voters to declare a party affiliation at the time of registration, or be declared “independent.” Those who do not would be able to change their party affiliation. A 30 day waiting period would apply in odd-numbered years. In even numbered years (typically election years), a voter would have to change party affiliation–even if they are already registered–at least 31 days prior to the primary; the change would take effect after 30 days, meaning that the change would take effect the day before the primary and after early voting has closed, resulting in new voters being shut out of early voting.

It isn’t hard to see how the change would hurt Democrats in Texas. Given that more and more people are voting Democratic who were previously independent or Republican, it would mean that more people would have to cross a hurdle before being able to vote in the party’s primaries.

The change would also mean that Democratic campaigns in the primary would be spending a lot of money not just on voter registration but making sure that voters who did want to vote in those primaries changed their affiliation before the primary.

While I’ve always thought that a “closed primary” and closed party system that prevented interlopers from taking part in party activities might be good (not to mention keeping people who aren’t really Democrats from seeking office at the local level with the party affiliation), it is pretty clear that this isn’t good for Texas at a time in which the electorate’s party affiliation is changing so rapidly.

Pegasus News content partner - Capitol Annex

Staff
Verified User
Anonymous

Travis Bush, says:

Title on this one needs an edit.

Verified

9 months, 1 week ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Mike Orren, says:

Nice catch, Travis.

Again: Citizen journalism is a myth; citizen copy editing less so.

Staff

9 months, 1 week ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

John McClelland, says:

I would have to agree with a closed system, but it could be hybrid.

Mike might remember this. When I lived in NC, their system allowed you to register as Republican, Democrat, Independent, Libertarian, or Unafilliated. If you registered as R, D, or L, you could only vote in their primaries. If you registered as I, you could not vote in a primary at all. If you registered as UA, you did have the option of voting in a primary, but you could only vote in one of them (just as we do here in Texas currently since we are all technically unaffiliated).

Being able to register by party also helps the parties out. It is hard to tell who really is an R or D if they crossover to vote in the other party's primary. It saves time on GOTV efforts.