The focus in the highly-contested Aug. 23 New York Democratic primary election will be, of course, on winners and losers. Will it be Carolyn Maloney or Jerrold Nadler in Manhattan? Can Mondaire Jones carry his carpetbag to victory in the newly drawn downtown Manhattan-Brooklyn district? But once the ballots are counted, city and county boards of elections should undertake another tally, this one focused on a different question: How many voters chose to switch their party (or non-party) status and enrolled as Democrats in order to vote in the party primary?
It’s not a question that would normally be asked — but this election, ordered by the courts to correct for gerrymandered congressional redistricting, is different. Its special rules have allowed voters, who usually would have had to register a party status change or choice last February, to make that decision by Aug. 11, just a few days before early voting began and just 12 days before the primary.
In other words, for the first time, New York State, which preens about its voting rights protections (as in the recent state law named for the late Congressman John Lewis) has, by virtue of oversight and circumstance, actually enfranchised voters in ways common, and important, in much of the country.
In much of the country, a variety of versions of so-called “open primaries” are the law. In 15 states, including Georgia, they allow voters to choose which party ballot they want to take on primary day. In a particularly dramatic example, Democrats in Wyoming who want to support Liz Cheney will have the chance to “cross over” to do so. Indeed, according to the National Council of State Legislatures, New York is one of only nine states to have a completely closed primary system. That means not only that Democrats may not vote in a Republican primary — and vice versa — but that unaffiliated voters, or independents, may not vote in primary elections at all.
New York City’s ranked-choice voting system for city primaries may help consensus candidates emerge — but, as a practical matter, only if they run as Democrats, who overwhelmingly outnumber Republicans (and to a lesser extent, independents) in the city. Making impactful voting even more difficult, a change in registration for a typical June primary has to have been made in February, long before the campaign has played out.
This year’s August primary enrollment change loophole only opened because Acting Justice Patrick McAllister in state Supreme Court in Steuben County, who ordered congressional districts to be redrawn, neglected to specify a so-called “blackout” period before the primary election date. Indeed, at one point it appeared that enrollment change on primary day itself was going to be permitted. McAllister ultimately amended his order to specify the Aug. 11 date, of which I was able to avail myself in order to be able to actually cast a meaningful vote in the primary, which will almost undoubtedly decide who my next member of Congress will be.
New York’s closed primary system contrasts sharply with that of another deep blue state, California, where the top two vote-getters in a nonpartisan primary election, no matter their party, face off in November. This means that centrist Republican or Democratic voters have a chance to choose moderates of either party — a pressing need in a polarized America.
To be sure, such change brings risks. For example, Democrats could mischievously push the Republican Party toward Trumpish candidates they hope will be unelectable in the fall.
But California’s “top-two” approach mitigates that problem — while expanding the franchise for independent, “non-affiliated” voters. Indeed, major cities, including Chicago and Boston, elect their mayors on the basis of a nonpartisan preliminary election, followed by a run-off by the top two finishers.
There is every reason to think that party enrollment will be affected by the short-lived primary loophole. Prior to the June 2021 New York City mayoral primary, some 68,000 unaffiliated (independent) voters enrolled as Democrats, as did more than 20,00 Republicans who switched parties. (Those figures were only determined when the political consulting firm Prime New York analyzed state voter file data.) The magnitude of that shift may well have affected the outcome of that primary, narrowly won by Eric Adams.
A more open primary system — including a regular enrollment change date closer to primary day — does not mean that parties will cease to matter. Indeed, it may increase pressure on both major parties to back candidates who will appeal to the median voters.
It may be too much to ask of the famously dysfunctional New York City Board of Elections to report on party enrollment switches and party choosing among the previously non-affiliated. But let’s hope that it and county boards do so. The results will be almost as interesting as which candidates win.
Husock is a senior fellow in domestic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute.
