I was reading Kim Strassel’s column today in the WSJ (requires subscription), and something that’s been in the back of my mind for a long time popped back up.
Why are delegates from states with open primaries considered bound?
For instance, Indiana. Yes, I know, by state law our primaries aren’t technically “open”, but anyone can lie about their party affiliation and vote, contra the law, in an opposing party’s primary.*
If Democrats can game the Republican primary (and, to be fair, vice versa) by violating the spirit, if not the letter, of the law,** how can the Indiana primary election be considered anything but advisory to the two parties?
In Virginia, it’s just been ruled that the parties can’t bind their delegates. If that’s true in Virginia, I can’t see how it isn’t true in Indiana.
So why don’t we repeal IC 3-10-1-2, which requires that “Each political party whose nominee received at least ten percent (10%) of the votes cast in the state for secretary of state at the last election shall hold a primary election under this chapter to select nominees to be voted for at the general election”, and the rest of IC 3-10-1 that has to do with primary elections, and just go back to the smoke-filled room? I still maintain, as I have long done, that historically we nominated better candidates and had better government that way. And the best part was it didn’t cost the taxpayers a dime.
________________
* IC 3-10-1-6. See https://iga.in.gov/legislative/laws/2015/ic/titles/003/articles/010/chapters/001/ and scroll down.
** Which is unenforceable anyway, since ballots are secret and you don’t have to take a lie detector test to vote.