League members review draft study on primary election reform

Beth Hendricks, executive director of the League of Women Voters of Colorado, opened a meeting of the league’s Alternative Voting Methods Task Force to discuss a draft study on primary election reform and to invite feedback from local leagues and members.

The draft, largely authored by Marcus Ogrren, frames a central challenge it calls the “ignorable opposition problem”: in heavily one-party districts, the dominant party’s primary often ignores the preferences of voters outside that party, effectively making the primary the decisive election and leaving many voters unrepresented. “We came up with the name ignorable opposition problem,” a presenter said, summarizing the study’s central diagnosis.

Why it matters: presenters said as districts have grown more polarized and fewer voters register with parties, primaries increasingly determine final officeholders. The study examines a range of approaches used elsewhere — California’s top-two system, Alaska’s all-candidates primary, two-winner approval experiments in St. Louis — and evaluates tradeoffs for both primaries and general elections.

Methods examined include newer ranked or scored approaches. The presenters noted STAR voting and Condorcet-style methods as options that have been trialed in other jurisdictions and that may address some failures of existing systems. “There are some new voting methods, in particular STAR voting which is been trialled in some places in Oregon and Condorcet voting,” one presenter said, and the study discusses where those methods might fit with an all-candidate primary model.

Members asked questions about objectives and evidence. One participant asked whether the study aims to identify an ideal system or a Colorado-specific proposal; presenters said the goal is to produce recommendations tailored to Colorado — specifying primary and general rules and how they would work together — and to compile comparative evidence on turnout and other effects.

Concerns raised included the political power of party organizations and the practice of “primaring” candidates who depart from party orthodoxy. Speakers said some reforms — for example, an all-candidates primary open to the entire electorate — can reduce party gatekeeping and make it harder for parties to use primary threats as political weapons, while noting parties also perform useful functions like recruitment and messaging.

Participants also asked whether alternative primary designs would affect campaign finance. Presenters said the study does not deeply analyze finance but flagged several separate reforms and experiments discussed in other states: a Maine court approach to limiting certain contributions, proposals in states such as Montana to constrain outside spending, and local programs such as Seattle’s campaign-voucher experiments (giving residents small vouchers to contribute to candidates).

The meeting included local and procedural items: concerns about petition and assembly rules that limit ballot access and competition were discussed, and a participant, Jesse Cuman, asked for volunteer help gathering signatures for a Boulder County home-rule petition. "We're up against a big wall of 13,500 signature requirements," Cuman said, adding that placing home rule on the local ballot is “16 times more difficult” than qualifying a congressional candidate under current thresholds.

Next steps: presenters reminded members the study remains a draft, that Marcus Ogrren will present at the league’s annual meeting when there will be more time for discussion, and that the study group will solicit input from local leagues before any formal board review and member vote. Links to the draft and appendices were shared in the chat for members to review and comment.