The Washington Post has a front of the Metro Section article about the kerfuffle that has developed over the loyalty pledge that voters in Virginia’s February 12th primary will have to sign if they want to vote:
RICHMOND, Nov. 28 — The loyalty pledge to the Republican Party that Virginia voters will be required to sign if they vote in the state’s GOP presidential primary on Feb. 12 is another attempt by the party to police the open primary system.
On Feb. 12, a GOP primary voter will have to sign a piece of paper that says, “I, the undersigned, pledge that I intend to support the nominee of the Republican Party for President.”
(…)
Charles E. Judd, executive director of the Republican Party of Virginia, said party officials want to make it harder for non-Republicans to participate in the GOP primary.
“We feel we need the right to say to someone figuratively, ‘If you intend to support the Democrat candidate in the fall general election, you probably shouldn’t help us pick our candidate,’ ” Judd said
What about someone like me, who might vote Republican — but definitely won’t do it if the nominee is named Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain or Mitt Romney ?
To me the solution here is obvious. Either change Virginia law to provide that only “registered” party members can vote in primaries or pick your candidate via convention. Since I don’t think that the state should be involved in internal party matters to begin with, I’d prefer the convention route, but I doubt we’ll ever return to those days.
November 29th, 2007 at 8:41 am
If you cannot support Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain or Mitt Romney, why would you want to participate in a Republican primary? Like it or not these men are representative of the Republican Party.
The loyalty oath is a feature of the Republican Party. I do not like it either, but I understand the motivation for it, and I doubt it will go away soon. Even if you attended a Republican convention, there would be a loyalty pledge.
I also understand that most Republicans prefer party registration; I do not. Like you, I would prefer the government stay almost entirely out of the matter.
For much the same reasons as we try to keep our government out of the business of promoting religion, we should keep government out of the business of establishing political parties. We use political parties to voice the will of the People. Proper government echos the will of the People. When government control becomes excessive, the People and their political parties voice the will of government.
Consider that incumbent politicians are often reelected running under a party’s label even when a party’s rank and file cannot stomach them. At the same time, due to excessive government regulation, it has become ridiculously difficult to establish a viable third party. Hence, the two big parties have little control over incumbent officials and the People have little choice between candidates.
We have so regulated political parties that they have weak voices. Unfortunately, most people are not even aware there is a problem. So the problem is difficult to repair. Still, there are possibilities. The solution depends upon People getting involved and demanding their voice back via the political party of THEIR choice.
November 29th, 2007 at 4:17 pm
Only a mindless adherence to party loyalty would say that someone who considers themselves Republican enough that they want to influence who the nominee is would be obligated to support the eventual nominee — even if that nominee went completely against what they believed in.
I understand the concern with “outsiders” influencing party matters, but if they RPV really wants to deal with that they have two choices:
1. Call a convention or,
2. Change Virginia law to end open primaries.
November 29th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
“Only a mindless adherence….” If you had listed only one or two candidates, I might take your comment about mindless adherence more seriously. However, you did not list just one candidate, you listed four of the leading candidates. These guys have held office as Republicans in states across the country, and each represents a distinctly different part of the political spectrum.
Conventions do not necessarily provide a solution to the “problem” you pose. If you want to attend a convention, the following is on the form you have to sign (example from here).
I suspect the best solution would be to get government out of the business of regulating the operation of political parties. The government should act to prevent fraudulent practices, but it should not tell political parties how they have to do their business. With wide open competition for members, I expect the Republican Party would have little interest in putting up this particular barrier to membership.
Even given the current situation, this barrier, this loyalty pledge, is counterproductive. The people it keeps out are honorable people who take giving their pledge seriously. Those are exactly the people any political party should want.
November 29th, 2007 at 8:55 pm
Here’s my pledge: I will vote in the Republican primary, sign the pledge, and vote the the candidate who I believe will be the weakest in the general election in November. Then in November, in case I have changed my mind, I might vote for the Dem, or even write in someone else. Sort of a signing statement to my pledge.