What is it about the word "open" that sends chills down the spines of some
political types?

In this case I'm talking about the open primary Sen. Abel Maldonado, R-Santa
Maria, strong-armed the Legislature into putting on the 2010 ballot in
exchange for his vote to close the state budget gap.

I've always liked the idea of an open primary because it would give me a
greater range of choice. Like most voters, I'm not a die-hard party
faithful. I've never given money to any candidate, cause or party.

Under Maldonado's proposal, I and other voters like me, could vote for
whichever congressional or state level candidate we wanted, regardless of
party affiliation and the two top vote-getters, again regardless of party,
would face off in the general election.

That's perfect for me. I like to weigh each candidate's track record and how
they approach the issues that matter most to me, regardless of the letter
after their name.

Besides giving voters more choice, many political reformers believe an open
primary would produce more moderate candidates instead of the wild-eyed
ideologues now roaming the Capitol who create more confrontation than
forward movement.

Even in lopsided districts where one party vastly outnumbers the other, the
theory is that if you had a slate full of Democrats, the strongest candidate
would be one who also appealed to moderate or even conservative voters in
order to win a slot in the general election.

As for possible mischief being a major concern, A.G. Block, longtime former
editor of the political magazine California Journal and now director of the
public affairs/journalism program at University of California Center
Sacramento, shrugged it off.

"You hear all the time that the Dems could vote for the weakest Republican
or vice versa,² he said. 'So what? The Republican would still win. But I
don't think that happens much anyway.

"The more logical conclusion is that the Democrat, or Republican,  would
look for the candidate who was closer to their own views."

Over time, that could help put more open-minded legislators in Sacramento,
he said.

We made a stab at having an open primary in 1998. But the major political
parties sued and it was declared unconstitutional because it interfered with
the parties' right of free association.

Another attempt in 2004 was thwarted after leaders in the Legislature pulled
a really scummy trick and put a competing measure on the ballot at the last
minute that included an unrelated sweetener calling for the sale of excess
state property to pay down the deficit. (Kevin McCarthy, now our
congressman, and state Sen. Roy Ashburn both voted for this.)

The flim-flam worked and we still have a closed primary, sort of.

If you're a "decline to state" rather than a registered party member, you
can sometimes vote in another party's primary IF that party allows it in
that election and only for certain races as designated by the party.

Not exactly "open."

A quick poll of our legislators found that Sen. Dean Florez, a Democrat, is
for an open primary and Ashburn, a Republican, is against it.
Assemblyman Danny Gilmore, R-Hanford, voted for Maldonado's measure, even
though he voted against other portions of the budget package.

"I think it possibly could help,² he told me. "I'll tell you there are some
real strong opinions in that building far to the left and right. I find it
interesting and frustrating, honestly." Gilmore noted the growing number of
independents, people who¹ve left both parties, in his home district. He
expects that trend to continue.

Assemblywoman Jean Fuller, R-Bakersfield, did not return my calls.

Ashburn, who stood by his 2004 vote, said an open primary is bad for
democracy.

"If people who don't share the same philosophies, principles and ideals of a
certain party get to select that party's nominee, it seems to me it would be
the end of political parties and they are fundamental to our way of
democracy," Ashburn said.

Still, he said, it should be up to voters to decide.

Florez predicted a fight.

"The chamber and business interests would probably support it given the
likely outcome of more moderates being elected," Florez said in an email.

"However, would this be another fight where the Congressional Dems and Reps
try to kill the initiative so they don¹t have to worry about playing in a
different game.

"Both parties will will oppose it."

He couldn't be more right about that.

"I don¹t think it's right for Republicans to chose my candidates," said
Candi Easter, chair of the Kern County Democratic Central Committee. "My
position in my party IS to influence candidates and legislators to bring
them closer to my way of thinking."

"I'm 100 percent opposed to it," said Stan Harper, long-time local
Republican campaign consultant. "It's totally unfair that Democrats or
Republicans would have the opportunity to vote in a primary to help elect a
nominee from the opposing party in order to make them more conservative or
more liberal."

Well, at least they can agree on that.

Opinions expressed in this column are those of Lois Henry, not The
Bakersfield Californian. Her  column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. Commentat people.bakersfield.com/home/Blog/noholdsbarred, call her at 395-7373 or e-mail lhenry@bakersfield.com