So Louisiana can't go back to the old calendar.
For example:
http://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=211602
Alaska held an all party primary in 1996. This was much like the Louisiana open primary, except that the general election included the top winner of each party's votes.
I think it may be a case that it
did. BTW, that was a pretty amazing election in Alaska since about 85% of the people voted for the Republican.
Washington State had long had what is called a
blanket primary. The minor parties nominated a candidate at conventions who then ran on the primary ballot, against the candidates for the nomination of the major parties. Everyone was on one ballot, so there could be 2 Democrats, 3 Republicans, 1 Libertarian, and 1 Green on the ballot.
A voter could only vote for one candidate in each race, but could totally disregard the party, voting for a Democrat in one race, a Green in the next, etc.
The votes were counted differently for the major parties and the minor parties. A minor party candidate had to get 1%(?) of the vote to be placed on the general election ballot, while the top vote getter for the major parties advanced to the general election.
California adopted a similar plan (by the initiative) as did Alaska. In California, there was no pre-primary process for minor parties, who were treated the same as any other party. In the only election it was used for, there were a couple of Libertarians seeking to run for a couple of legislative seats, and a bunch of people crossed over to decide who the Libertarian candidate was, since there wasn't a contest for the Democrat and Republican nomination in that race.
The California law was challenged on the basis that it violated the parties' rights of association, and also diluted the political message of minor parties, and was oveturned by the USSC in:
California Democratic Party v. Jones, U.S. 99-401 (2000)Throughout the decision, the judges suggested that a Louisiana-style open primary would be acceptable because it wasn't nominating party candidates, but simply reducing the field as part of the process of selecting state officers.
Alaska's law was overturned as well, as eventually was Washington's (Washington had been conducting its elections illegally for 2/3 of its history).
In response, Washington and California voters initiated a new format, which in Washington was called the "Top 2 Primary" by proponents, and a "Cajun Primary" by opponents who raised the spectre of Edwin Edwards and David Duke. The difference between Washington and Louisiana was, that in Washington, the two top candidates regardless of party would contest the general election, even if one had a majority in the primary. This avoids the risk of the primary making a final decision in a congressional election before the national election day.
The California initiative was defeated, but the Washington initiative passed. But it was challenged in court, and overturned (last year). It is currently being considered by the 9th Court of Appeals.
Washington Top 2 Litigation
