As Indiana Republicans toil to eject Diego Morales from the secretary of state’s office, some conservatives are advocating for a change that would nominate more people like Morales.
Lt. Gov. Micah Beckwith represents a growing contingent of right-wing voices calling for closed primaries, a system in which voters would have to register by party affiliation in advance of primary elections. The point is to restrict primaries to voters who strongly identify with political parties — and to prevent those voters from crossing over to the other side whenever they feel like it.
It’s a longstanding debate that’s become especially salient in recent weeks.
Beckwith and others argue, with strong evidence, that left-leaning voters pulled Republican ballots to oppose President Donald Trump’s endorsed candidates in the May 5 primaries. It seems to have made a difference. State Sen. Spencer Deery, R-West Lafayette, won his primary against Trump-endorsed Paula Copenhaver by three votes, pending a recount.
Copenhaver notes that news reports and social media posts show Democrats voted for Deery to spite Trump. She argues those votes should be tossed out, making her the winner.
However that dispute resolves, there’s real momentum toward closing Indiana’s primaries in the future. That would have a purification effect, producing general election candidates more appealing to party bases than to the public at large.
That would help Democrats in the long run.
The people gaming the system want to lock it in
It’s no coincidence Beckwith is leading Indiana’s closed primary movement. He’s among the greatest beneficiaries of insider party politics.
Beckwith rose to statewide office the same way Morales did — by adopting extreme positions and ingratiating himself with the small circle of party insiders who nominate candidates at party conventions.
Interestingly, Max Engling, who is Sen. Jim Banks’ handpicked challenger to Morales, has also come out in favor of closed primaries. This is an example of the self-contained feedback loop at play. Engling faces convention darling Morales in the secretary of state’s race, so he’s placating the conservative base with a promise to give it more power in primary elections.
Parties use conventions to nominate candidates for some statewide offices, including secretary of state, attorney general and lieutenant governor. Most races go to primary voters, including governor, Congress and the state legislature. Closing the primaries would push those nominations in the same insular direction as conventions.
The more exclusive the nominating process, the more likely it is to self-select populists who learn to game the system.
Voters in closed primaries would likely be more skeptical of degenerate demagogues than convention delegates. But a closed primary would still reward candidates who mirror voters’ preferences — and those preferences are more likely to be at odds with independents and Democrats who vote in general elections.
Consider Richard Mourdock, the far-right Republican whose remarks on rape and abortion opened the door for Democrat Joe Donnelly to defeat him in the 2012 U.S. Senate race. He emerged from Indiana’s existing primary system. A closed primary increases the odds Republicans will nominate more broadly unacceptable candidates.
Republicans would no doubt say the same for Democrats. Registered Democrats would prefer candidates further to the left than current primary voters. But Republicans’ dominance in Indiana serves as a check on Democrats’ extremism.
A truly far-left Democrat wouldn’t get far in this state regardless of the nominating system. For now, Democrats’ problem is the party’s mainstream unpopularity.
Selling it is easier than doing it
This might not actually go anywhere.
The closed primary idea could just be another version of the congressional term limit pledge — an issue that signals solidarity with voters without requiring elected officials to actually do anything.
Altering Indiana’s primary system would force voters to register all over again while also perhaps shifting millions of dollars in election administration costs from state government to the political parties. Those are substantial barriers.
Republican leaders could decide the downsides outweigh the benefits. Especially when they look at who’s most likely to prevail in closed primaries. Beckwith isn’t hyping closed primaries out of some sincere conviction for election integrity. He’s pushing for a system that makes it easier for him to win future elections.
Closed primaries will create more problems like the one Republicans are dealing with now: a corrupt secretary of state who has given Democrats a chance to win statewide office in November. Many Republicans might not like moderates, or especially Democrats, but their presence in Republican primary elections is doing the party a service.
Indiana’s partially open primaries produce Republican candidates who are palatable enough to win most — but not all — general elections. Closed primaries would nominate worse Republican candidates and almost certainly hand some otherwise winnable races over to Democrats.
Contact James Briggs at 317-444-4732 or james.briggs@indystar.com. Follow him on X at @JamesEBriggs.
This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: Closing Indiana’s primaries would help Democrats | Opinion
Reporting by James Briggs, Indianapolis Star / Indianapolis Star
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
