Why CA’s top-two primary isn’t working the way voters intended

When California adopted the top-two open primary system in 2010, proponents argued it would help make the state more moderate because candidates would be compelled to court voters across the political spectrum.

But since then, most races still end in typical partisan fashion with one Democrat and one Republican duking it out to advance to the general election, report CalMatters’ Ben Christopher and Jeanne Kuang. 

So is it time to scrap the system altogether?

As blue as California is, it’s still rare for two Democrats to face one another in a statewide general election contest, said Andrew Sinclair, a political scientist at Claremont McKenna College. Though the state is reliably left-leaning enough to have never elected a Republican to statewide office since 2006, it’s not so overwhelmingly Democratic that two Democrats regularly advance.

There are some exceptions, however, such as the insurance commissioner’s race where two Democrats are currently holding the top spots.

Democratic and GOP voters alike also tend to treat the top-two system as if it were a partisan primary — coalescing around the candidate they consider the strongest representative of their party — even though the system is officially nonpartisan.

This, in part, helps box out candidates with more nuanced ideological distinctions — such as Matt Mahan, the moderate Democratic mayor of San Jose who ran for governor criticizing “extremism on both sides” and received 4% of the vote — or upstart progressives.

• Eric McGhee, a political researcher at the Public Policy Institute of California: “The evidence we have of how voters view these contests is that they don’t have a clue who the moderate or the liberal is. … It’s always a good bet that voters are way way way less tapped into the nuances of what’s going on than you are if you’re interested in politics.”

The top-two primary system is also vulnerable to “cynical gaming” in which one candidate boosts the candidate they consider easier to beat in the general election. In the 2024 primary, for example, a super PAC backing Democratic U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff put millions of dollars behind GOP candidate Steve Garvey, undercutting Democratic former Rep. Katie Porter’s chances.

Critics of the top-two system, such as Democratic political consultant Steve Maviglio who has filed a proposed ballot measure to repeal the system, are pushing to either return to partisan primaries or adopt ranked choice voting, which allows voters to rank their candidates by preference.

Read more.

Votes are still being counted. Check out CalMatters’ live election results.

Six years after California passed a law allowing prisoners to appeal their convictions if they believe racial bias tainted their trials, the California Supreme Court overturned a death sentence for the first time under the Racial Justice Act, writes CalMatters’ Nigel Duara.

In 1991 a jury found Anthony Bankston, a Los Angeles gang member, guilty of killing a rival gang member. During the trial, a prosecutor compared Bankston — appearing in a suit and tie — to a Bengal tiger at the zoo.

Under the 2020 law, certain animal images are prohibited because they risk appealing to racial bias. The state Supreme Court earlier this week reversed Bankston’s death sentence but upheld his murder conviction. A trial court will revisit Bankston’s sentencing.

Bankston’s case was one of four decisions the court released that stemmed from claims under the Racial Justice Act. The court upheld the death sentences for two other men, and in a fourth case modified rulings against two prisoners, but not due to their claims under the act.

Read more.

From CalMatters politics reporter Yue Stella Yu:

Want to know exactly who paid for your elected official’s trip to Europe? No way, say California lawmakers.

The legislators, who frequently travel on special interests’ dime, last week quietly shelved a measure that would have required more of those sponsors to reveal their donors and break down their spending for each trip they paid for. The Fair Political Practices Commission, the state’s campaign ethics watchdog agency, spearheaded the proposal.

Most sponsors are nonprofit who are largely allowed to keep their donors secret. The San Francisco-based California Foundation on the Environment and the Economy and the pro-housing group California YIMBY are among the organizations that have paid for lawmakers’ travel. 

Last year, nonprofits spent $1.1 million flying lawmakers across the world, where elected officials often mingled with lobbyists in private. Ethics advocates have long criticized the practice.

• Shery Yang, spokesperson for the FPPC: “Greater transparency in this context is critical to strengthening public trust and helping Californians better understand the relationships and interests that can shape public decision making.”

A federal judge handed local officials a win Wednesday in their ongoing dispute against the federal government, ruling that San Diego County health inspectors are allowed access to the privately-run Otay Mesa Detention Center. County leaders sought an inspection after CalMatters published a series of stories on detention conditions. Read more from CalMatters’ Wendy Fry.