Proposition 3 | Rebuttal to Argument in Favor | Proposition 3 | Rebuttal to Argument Against |
Partisan Presidential Primary Elections.
Legislative Initiative Amendment.
Argument against Proposition 3
Arguments on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency.

California's voters overwhelmingly approved the open primary in 1996 and used it for the first time last June. For the first time, ALL voters--no matter what their party affiliation--could vote for the candidate of their choice instead of being forced to choose between several Republican candidates or several Democratic candidates.

Thousands of voters took the opportunity to cross "party lines" and cast ballots for the person they thought could best represent them in office. Independent voters not affiliated with any political party were able to vote for candidates in the primary for the first time.

Affording voters more choices is healthy for democracy and good for the government of California.

We have just begun this change, and we should give it a fair chance to work.

That's why you should VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 3.

Proposition 3 would limit the primary election for the most important office we decide upon: President of the United States.

Proposition 3 would allow only voters who are registered to vote with a particular political party to cast ballots for the delegates that choose Presidential nominees. Democrats would be allowed to choose only between Democrat slates. Republicans would be allowed to choose only between Republican slates.

Independent voters would not be allowed to vote for Presidential delegates at all!

Let's not turn back the clock on reform. Let's keep California's primary open by Voting NO on Proposition 3.

JACK SCOTT
Assemblymember, 44th District
Proposition 3 | Rebuttal to Argument in Favor | Proposition 3 | Rebuttal to Argument Against |