Editorial: Ballot measure would transform primary elections
In Massachusetts, a series of proposed referendum questions are making their way through the qualifying process for the 2026 state ballot, each offering intriguing possibilities for reform. Among these proposals is a significant change to the state’s electoral system: the introduction of an all-party primary. This initiative, which has garnered considerable support, aims to allow all candidates for statewide office to appear on a single primary ballot, enabling voters, regardless of their party affiliation, to select their preferred candidate. This shift from the current system, where voters must choose within their registered party or select a specific party ballot as independents, is seen as a move toward a more inclusive and democratic process.
Supporters of the all-party primary gathered at the Massachusetts State House to deliver tens of thousands of signatures for certification, emphasizing that such a system would enhance voter choice and engagement. Danielle Allen, chair of the Coalition for Healthy Democracy, highlighted that a healthy democracy ensures every voter’s voice is heard and valued. Proponents cite successful implementations of all-party primaries in states like California, Alaska, and Louisiana, which have reported increases in election competition and voter participation. They argue that the current primary system often leads to candidates who cater to the extremes of their parties, thereby exacerbating partisan polarization. A notable statistic from Unite America reveals that only 10% of eligible Americans participated in primary elections that determined the winners in 83% of Congressional seats in 2020, underscoring the need for reform.
The push for an all-party primary in Massachusetts comes at a time when a significant portion of the electorate identifies as unenrolled voters, representing 65% of the state’s registered voters. This demographic shift highlights the limitations of the current primary system, which tends to favor entrenched party candidates and can lead to uncompetitive general elections. If the all-party primary question makes it to the ballot and receives voter approval, it could reshape the political landscape in Massachusetts, fostering a more dynamic and representative electoral process. As the Secretary of State prepares to certify the signatures, the outcome of this initiative could pave the way for a transformative approach to primaries, aligning Massachusetts with a growing national movement advocating for electoral reform.
Proposed Massachusetts referendum questions wending their way through the qualifying process for the 2026 state ballot represent some interesting possibilities.
One would lower the state income tax rate from 5% to 4%, another would trigger more frequent refunds from excess tax collections, while another would subject the governor’s office and the state Legislature to the mandates of the Public Records Law.
But one really strikes at the heart of the democratic process — creating an all-party state primary.
Supporters of that ballot question gathered on the State House steps Monday before delivering tens of thousands of signatures to officials for certification.
If the question were to pass next fall, all candidates for a statewide race would appear on a single primary ballot.
Any voter — no matter the party affiliation — could cast a ballot for the candidate of their choice, as opposed to the current system, in which voters must choose within their registered party, or select one specific party ballot if they’re independent and registered as unenrolled.
Proponents contend that it creates a fairer and more open system.
“Healthy democracies mean choice; it means every voter’s vote matters; it means no voter is taken for granted,” said Danielle Allen, chair of the Coalition for Healthy Democracy.
The question’s supporters point to other states — both red and blue — that already implement all-party primaries, including California, Alaska, and Louisiana, each of which has reported an uptick in both election competition and voter participation.
Municipal elections in Massachusetts employ a similar system, where unaffiliated candidates run for office on a single ballot.
The Secretary of State will officially certify newly-submitted ballot signatures this week, determining which move on to the next round of consideration.
According to an NPR report in September 2023, the movement to update the primary election process has been gaining momentum across the nation.
Reform-minded advocates and many political scientists agree that the present system isn’t working. That’s because a relatively small number of voters are selecting their party’s nominee — often in a district or state that leans strongly toward one party.
Which usually means that whoever wins the primary cruises to victory in a general election. That’s a scenario often repeated in Massachusetts elections.
The group Unite America underscored what it terms the “primary problem” with this startling statistic: In 2020, “only 10% of eligible Americans nationwide cast ballots in primary elections that effectively decided the winners in a supermajority (83%) of Congressional seats.”
A microcosm of that dynamic plays out in this state in virtually every municipal election.
Experts and advocates say the primary election process excludes voters and leads to more extreme candidates who mainly appeal to activists, and could be exacerbating partisan polarization.
According to the Massachusetts Secretary of State’s Office, as of February, unenrolled voters represented the vast majority of the electorate — 65%, compared to 26% for Democrats and just 8% Republicans.
The state’s Democrat-dominated political machine won’t like it, but a vote for open primaries — should it appear on the 2026 state ballot — would ensure a more inclusive, competitive political process.
Sentinel and Enterprise
Editorial cartoon by Chip Bok (Creators Syndicate)
