Editorial:

Crackdown on crossover voting would be a mistake

Posted 2/27/20

A bill now being considered by state lawmakers would make our primary elections just a little more polarized and a little less accessible.

House Bill 209, which is co-sponsored by Rep. Dan …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in
Editorial:

Crackdown on crossover voting would be a mistake

Posted

A bill now being considered by state lawmakers would make our primary elections just a little more polarized and a little less accessible.

House Bill 209, which is co-sponsored by Rep. Dan Laursen, R-Powell, and a number of other legislators, would prohibit voters from switching their party affiliation on primary election day or in the 14 days leading up to the election.

The idea does have some common sense appeal and the bill’s lead sponsor, Rep. Jim Blackburn, R-Cheyenne, said in a Tuesday news release that “several stakeholder groups” support it.

However, we believe lawmakers should stick with the current process and continue to give voters every opportunity to fully participate in the primary.

In his release, Blackburn didn’t elaborate on why he brought the bill, offering that, “This is an important issue that can have a significant impact on Wyoming elections.”

But the origins of this proposed crackdown on so-called “crossover voting” are no secret. The “primary” driving force was then-gubernatorial candidate Mark Gordon’s win in Wyoming’s August 2018 Republican primary over financier Foster Friess and others.

Those who opposed Gordon came to believe that liberal Democrats and unaffiliated voters propelled his 9,100-vote victory by switching over to the GOP.

There’s certainly evidence to suggest they helped.

A “Switch for Wyoming” campaign, backed by a group called Independent Republicans of Wyoming, specifically encouraged Democrats and independents to change their affiliations and support Gordon. And for whatever the reason, about 10,400 Democrats and independents wound up becoming Republicans in weeks surrounding the election. (In Park County specifically, 367 voters joined the Republican party, with more than half having previously been unaffiliated.)

However, unless some 87.5% or more of Wyoming’s crossover voters picked Gordon and effectively none of them voted for Friess — a nearly impossible scenario — the party switchers didn’t make the difference. Regardless, the perception has persisted that the crossover voters flipped the governor’s race.

Wyoming Republican Party leaders and others pushed for restrictions on party switching during last year’s Legislative Session. Some Republican lawmakers suggested barring changes early on in election years. Sen. Cheri Steinmetz, R-Lingle, went as far as to propose no switching after May 1 — a couple weeks before voters even know who’s running for office.

In only prohibiting party-switching in the two weeks leading up to primary election day, House Bill 209 is far more reasonable, and it would affect a relatively small percentage of voters. However, we still think it would be better for lawmakers to continue to allow Wyomingites to pick a party even on election day.

There certainly is an argument to be made that a party’s primary election should be limited to folks who are committed to that party for more than, say, a day. But in Republican-dominated Wyoming, primary elections are much more than party affairs: They often are the only time that voters can choose between two candidates. And even when there is a Democrat running at the state or county level, a GOP nominee enjoys an almost insurmountable advantage from the “R” behind their name in this extremely Republican state.

That’s also another reason why we would encourage lawmakers to leave our current system in place: In a day and age that appears to bring more polarization every day, we should be doing everything we can to allow people to vote for whomever they believe is the best candidate for the job.

Comments