I was talking to Ben Holder a few minutes ago and the issue of the non-partisan or not city council races came up. Ben had a very good point that he said his yard sign distribution commitment will keep him from blogging about: Non-partisan does not mean that political parties do not get involved, they have to varying degrees for years. It does not mean that a candidate's affiliation is not considered by those for whom that matters.
What it defines, simply, is the way in which candidates enter and advance through a city council election. In a non-partisan race, unaffiliated voters may enter and run without having to align with a party. It also means that the candidates who advance through a primary are not, through an artificial construct, necessarily each of differing parties. In an unaffiliated race, the most popular of the field advance whoever they may be--not the most popular Democrat and the most popular Republican.
For my conservative friends who think partisan elections might be a good thing for some reason, if the pure math is not enough for you (Democrats far outnumber Republicans in Greensboro) consider the effects of partisan races on this year's elections:
District 3 would be Zack Matheny vs. Jay Ovittore
In a partisan race, the highest vote-getting Republican (Matheny) would be running against the highest vote-getting Democrat (Ovittore). Those of you who like Republican George Hartzman would be out of luck. As it stands, made possible by non-partisan elections, top vote-getter Republican Matheny will face off against second most vote-getter Republican Hartzman.
District 1 would be T. Dianne Bellamy-Small vs. Charles Coffey
A partisan primary would have guaranteed a Bellamy Small reelection. As it stands, made possible by non-partisan elections, Democrat Bellamy Small will face Democrat Luther T. Falls, and there is a reasonable chance for new representation from District 1.
Them's the facts. I'll be on the lookout for reason why partisan city council races would be beneficial.
For the record, Hartzman is Unaffiliated, NOT Republican. Therefore, the race would have been between all three just as it has taken place.
ReplyDeleteRoch, I believe Hartzman is unaffiliated.
ReplyDeleteBut what you've described here takes place plenty of times in partisan elections, meaning, the primary sometimes determines the election winner.
Thank you for the correction, gentlemen. And yes, Tony, that is precisely my point, that in partisan elections, the primary often determines the winner. We are better off that it does not council races.
ReplyDelete(And the matter of how unaffiliated candidates would make the ballot if elections were partisan is of concern as well. Often, it requires the collection of a certain number of signatures. So, in D3, we could have ended up with Matheny vs. Ovittore or it could have been Matheny vs. Ovittore vs. Hartzman.)