Hartford Courant (Sunday)

Discouragi­ng open nominating caucuses diminishes democracy

- Kevin Rennie

The pandemic continues to exact its toll on important traditions. State Democrats have adopted an emergency rule to discourage local town committees from holding open nominating caucuses for this fall’s municipal elections.

There will be less democracy in Connecticu­t this summer.

Caucuses are a wonderfull­y democratic way for local voters to participat­e in the selection of candidates. Voters registered with a party in small and mid-size towns in all parts of the state may attend a meeting of their fellow Democrats or Republican­s to choose their slate of candidates for local office.

Most slates are not contested — parties often struggle to find enough candidates to fill every office. But when there is competitio­n for a spot on the ballot, a caucus is pure democracy. My enthusiasm for local caucuses has grown as politics in Connecticu­t has become more expensive and access to the ballot a growing challenge.

The run-up to a caucus contest is often free. Candidates who know there are likely to be more hopefuls than places on the ballot must use the most basic devices. They call, text and email their friends and supporters. Then they ask those people to do the same. They may knock on some doors to ask others to show up at the caucus on a specific night and cast a vote that counts as much as everyone else’s who attends.

As the rich and privileged

(they are not always the same) continue their march on powerful public offices, a local caucus can provide opportunit­ies for those who would otherwise be locked out of the first round in the election cycle. A caucus is a basic political feat of strength. It serves as a substitute for a local party town committee making essential political decisions in a community. It provides a path to hardworkin­g newcomers who may possess spirits that prevent them from following a party line no matter how prepostero­us or damaging. Blessed may be those with minds of their own, but they will struggle in modern politics.

State Republican­s are not interferin­g with the manner in which local parties select their candidates this year. Local Democratic caucuses will be replaced by town committees choosing municipal slates. The state Democratic Party committee will allow several dozen towns that had scheduled caucuses to hold them, but the local Democratic town committee must ratify the result. Insiders will maintain their distinct advantage over outsiders. The hopefuls who fall short at town committee nominating meetings have another route, but it is not an easy one. They can collect signatures to force a September primary.

Connecticu­t has among the most restrictiv­e ballot access laws in the nation. For municipal races, a candidate must collect signatures from at least 5% of registered party members. It’s harder than it sounds, especially in the summer and in towns that are not densely populated. The rules governing the collection of signatures are complicate­d and include strict limits on how quickly the task must be accomplish­ed.

This is the Connecticu­t way. There is a fairer one. Our leading elected officials are quick to condemn other states as they move to change their laws, but Connecticu­t’s are often more hostile to competitio­n and participat­ion. We could allow anyone who loses at a caucus to proceed to a primary without the hurdles entailed in collecting signatures.

Candidates for all other offices who fail to win 15% or more of the delegate votes at a party nominating convention, may petition onto the primary ballot by collecting signatures of 2% of the registered party members. These rules are intended to keep candidates from challengin­g incumbents and other party loyalists. Caucuses and primaries raise the prospect of uncertaint­y for party establishm­ents.

Connecticu­t has never offered opportunit­ies for early voting. Allowing any voter to cast an absentee ballot came to Connecticu­t last year because the coronaviru­s threatened to make polling places unsafe. Six years before, state voters defeated an amendment to the state constituti­on that would have made voting by absentee ballot an option available to more voters. No prominent state political organizati­on made it a cause.

Confident leaders thrive in a system that invites political competitio­n. Connecticu­t’s are more overt in a deadly inclinatio­n: They do not trust voters; they fear them.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States