Apr 30, 2022 3 min read

Let’s say you’re a voter in Pennsylvania and you like the cut of David McCormick’s jib, or you believe that John Fetterman would be a breath of fresh air in the U.S. Senate.

The problem, though, is that if you are one of the growing number of voters in Pennsylvania not affiliated with either of the two major political parties, you will not be able to cast a ballot in the primary election coming up on May 17. The commonwealth is just one of nine states in the country that has closed primaries. This means that nearly 1.3 million registered voters, a full 15% of the 8.7 million adults who are on the voter rolls, are going to have to sit on the sidelines in two weeks as candidates are chosen to be Pennsylvania’s next U.S. senator and governor, along with congressional candidates and a whole array of legislative seats.

In communities where one party is dominant, the primary can be the most competitive race, with the fall general election little more than a formality. And, as we saw last year, ballot referendums can end up on the primary ballot, shutting out independent voters from decisions on amendments to the state constitution and other questions.

Is it fair that unaffiliated voters – the fastest-growing bloc of voters in the state – should be left out of the process? We don’t think so. At a moment when voting rights are under increasing threat, it’s time Pennsylvania opened its primaries and let all registered voters cast ballots.

Legislation that would make that happen has advanced in Harrisburg before, but has never quite made it over the finish line. The news site Spotlight PA reported this week that a group calling itself Ballot PA, a coalition that includes the League of Women Voters and Common Cause PA, is pushing to end closed primaries, which have been the rule in the state since 1937.

David Thornburgh, executive director of Ballot PA and the son of the late Gov. Richard Thornburgh – the kind of moderate, level-headed leader many look back on with nostalgia – told Spotlight PA, “The primary election really is often the only election … so if you don’t get to vote in the primary, you basically don’t have a vote. It’s hard to find a better example of taxation without representation.”

In a time of intense polarization, advocates believe opening primaries would allow for more middle-of-the-road candidates to come to the fore, since they would have to appeal to a larger slice of the electorate than the partisans that turn out for primaries.

Thornburgh said, “It shouldn’t be a surprise that the people who get elected in those elections are themselves, in fact, representing the extremes of both parties. To my mind, allowing 1.1 million less-partisan voters to participate in those elections broadens the base, increases competition for votes, and forces candidates to speak to a broader cross-section of the electorate.”

Opening our primaries won’t be a silver bullet that will bring peace to our rancorous politics, both in Harrisburg and Washington, D.C. But it would certainly help nudge us in a better direction.