Primary Reform
A look at primary reforms proposed in 2024
What is Primary Reform?
Primary elections are held to determine which candidates will appear in a general election. The laws governing primary elections vary widely, addressing things like who can vote in them and how candidates are selected to advance to the general. Primary elections typically have much lower turnout than general elections, but in areas dominated by one party, they can often be the determinative election, rendering the general election a mere formality.
“Primary reform,” for the purposes of this report, refers to reforms that would change the primary election process by either (1) changing who is eligible to vote in primary elections based on their party registration or membership status (i.e., whether the primary is open or closed, or something in between), or (2) changing whether primaries serve to decide a political party’s nominee or simply to narrow down the field of candidates who will appear in the general election (i.e., whether the primary is partisan or nonpartisan).
Legislation that would affect primary elections in other ways is not included here but may be addressed in other sections. For example, a bill that would adopt ranked choice voting for primary elections but make no changes to voter eligibility would be included in the Ranked Choice Voting section but not here. Partisan primary election types vary widely across the states. Nonpartisan primary election systems are common for local elections and certain positions (such as elected judgeships). Three states, California, Washington, and Alaska, use some form of nonpartisan primary election for all state and congressional elections, and Nebraska uses one to elect its state legislature.
Alaska’s adoption of a top four nonpartisan primary system in 2020 has fueled interest in nonpartisan primary systems like top four and final five.
Primary elections can be divided into two main categories:
A partisan primary is a primary election held to choose nominees of a political party to represent that party in a general election. This is the most common type of primary election at the state and federal levels. All presidential primary elections are partisan primaries. Types of partisan primaries include:
- Closed primary – A partisan primary in which only voters registered or otherwise affiliated with a particular party can vote.
- Semi-closed primary – A partisan primary in which only voters registered with a particular party and independent or unaffiliated voters can vote.
- Open primary – A partisan primary in which all qualified voters can vote, whether or not they are registered with any particular party.
- Partially open primary – A partisan primary in which only voters registered or otherwise affiliated with a particular party can vote, but voters can change their party affiliation on Election Day.
A nonpartisan primary, also known as a “nonpartisan blanket primary,” is a primary election in which all candidates run and all qualified voters can vote, regardless of party affiliation. Nonpartisan primaries are held to narrow down the field of candidates to determine who will appear in the general election. Candidates in nonpartisan primaries might be able to identify their preferred political party on the ballot, but candidates who advance from a nonpartisan primary to a general election are not the nominees of a political party. Nonpartisan primaries are common in local elections and are used in some places for state and congressional elections, such as in California, Alaska, and Washington. Some advocates refer to nonpartisan primaries as “open primaries,” but each can have distinct legal ramifications and policy outcomes, and this report follows the lead of most academic literature and case law and distinguishes between the two. Types of nonpartisan primaries include:
- Top two – A nonpartisan primary in which the two candidates with the most votes advance to a general election.
- Top four – Also known as “Final Four.” A nonpartisan primary in which the four candidates with the most votes advance to a general election. General elections held after Top Four primaries are conducted using ranked choice voting.
- Final five – Also known as “Top Five.” A variation of top four in which the five candidates with the most votes advance to a general election.
This report also tracks bans or repeals of nonpartisan primaries.
Why are we tracking it?
As general elections become increasingly uncompetitive thanks to things like gerrymandering and partisan geographic sorting, many reformers see primary elections as the best opportunity to improve electoral competition and promote moderation. Proposals to increase the number of voters who are eligible to vote in primaries, or change the role of primaries as nominating contests for party candidates, have become increasingly popular. Alaska’s adoption of a top four nonpartisan primary system in 2020 has fueled interest in nonpartisan primary systems like top four and final five.
Analysis
In any election year, but especially a presidential election year, it can be more difficult to pass major legislative changes to how primaries or elections broadly are run. This was evident this year. In total, we saw about 25% fewer bills introduced in this category compared to last year. The decline was even sharper for reforms that proposed nonpartisan primaries, which shrunk by around 70%, from 25 proposals in 2023 down to just eight in 2024. Beyond the drop in introductions, for the first time this year, we also started tracking nonpartisan primary bans, a proposal we previously hadn’t seen in state legislatures. There were still a few noteworthy passages from this category, but across the board interest in primary reform cooled off compared to last year.
Two states change course. Two statewide changes to primaries this year run counter to that trend. On the one hand, we have Rhode Island’s passage of S2418/H7662, which adopts semi-closed primaries, allowing independent voters to vote in party primaries without becoming affiliated. Previously, Rhode Island’s primary elections were closed to anyone not affiliated with a political party. When we look at primary systems on a spectrum of least to most open, this change moves Rhode Island’s primaries in the more open direction.
On the other hand, we have the passage of H17 in Louisiana. Previously, the state used a nonpartisan primary system often called a “jungle” or “Cajun” primary. Under this system, a single general election is held where all candidates run, regardless of party affiliation. If any candidate wins a majority of the vote, they are declared winner and the election is over. If no candidate wins a majority, then the two candidates with the most votes advance to a runoff election. But under H17, the state will switch to partially closed partisan nominating primaries for certain offices (U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representative, the Louisiana Supreme Court, the State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, and the Public Service Commission), leaving each party to decide if it wants to allow unaffiliated voters to participate. It’s important to note that neither of these bills went into effect before this year’s primary election dates in either state, but they still represent meaningful future changes during a turbulent election period.
Republicans supporting closed primaries. The Louisiana example contributes to a growing pattern of Republican majorities rejecting open and nonpartisan primaries, in favor of closed primaries. This is similar to a trend we noted last year in this report, where we found that all bills to adopt closed primaries were introduced solely by Republicans, and solely in states where Republicans control the governorship and the legislature. In 2024, only one proposal about closed primaries was introduced by Democrats (LD 1959 in Maine), and the other five were either Republican-sponsored or committee-sponsored in Republican-controlled states. Apart from the new law in Louisiana, only one other proposal for closed primaries came close. Arizona’s Democratic Governor Katie Hobbs vetoed legislation that would have allowed parties to choose a presidential nominee through a party membership vote instead of a public presidential primary, and to have sole discretion to choose the means of voting. Additionally, Texas will see some changes to Republican primaries, not through the legislative process but via a non-legislative party rule change, which enabled the Texas GOP to limit their party primaries to GOP-affiliated voters only, despite Texas being an open primary state.
Bans and repeals. We’re tracking nonpartisan primary bans for the first time A few noteworthy proposals come from the Republican trifecta state of Missouri referring a constitutional amendment to the ballot (HJR 104) which could ban nonpartisan primaries (and RCV). Another ban on nonpartisan primaries was introduced in Wisconsin (SJR 94), perhaps in response to a bipartisan proposal for Final Five Voting (AB 563 and SB 528). A repeal of nonpartisan primaries was proposed in Alaska (HB 4).
Decreased bipartisanship. Meanwhile, a separate trend we identified last year did not persist this session. In our last report, we noted that bills to adopt open primaries were more bipartisan, with equal numbers introduced by Republicans, Democrats, or bipartisan groups of legislators. This year, only two of the 12 proposals for open primaries had bipartisan support (Wisconsin’s SB528 and AB563) and none with just Republican support.
Overall, we’re starting to see legislative patterns here similar to what we’ve seen with RCV in previous years. This is no surprise to election reformers who often see these policies paired together in the form of final five/four voting, as popularized in Alaska. This year saw more division related to these proposals: less bipartisan sponsorship/support and more bans and repeals.