Alameda Times-Star on Propositions 62 and 60
From the Alameda Times-Star, who opposes both Proposition 62 and Proposition 60:

---

Our "no recommendation" on Prop. 62 stems partly from the fact that, like many Californians, we can't agree on how, or if, our election system should be modified....

Proposition 62, a creation of business and education groups, is a constitutional amendment that would open up primaries for all offices except president and party posts, while narrowing our choices in the general election. It would let primary voters, regardless of how they're registered, vote for any candidate on the ballot. All aspirants to an office would be listed.

Only the top two vote-getters would go on the general election ballot, however, no matter what their affiliation. It would essentially be a runoff. In safe, one-party districts, a pair of Republicans or Democrats may even end up as the only choices in November for a legislative seat or even U.S. senator.

Proponents say opening the primary curbs the power of party bosses and political insiders. Foes say it limits competition -- and choice -- in the general election, which attracts more voters and is the one in which we actually elect someone to office. That, in the view of dissenters, could reinforce the dominance of major political parties and moneyed interests.

It hurts smaller, minority parties such as the Greens and Libertarians, they argue, by stunting their growth and keeping them out of general elections. Diversity and openness would be undermined, they assert.

Proposition 60 is an anti-62 measure that provides an option the authors thought might out-poll Proposition 62, or so confuse things that the current system remains. We recommend a "no" vote on 60....

Opponents say 60 doesn't go far enough because it only addresses general elections, not primaries. We could still end up hopping among so-called open, closed or blanket primaries, depending on the political whim of the moment....

---