The Democratic primary of 2006 drew the largest voter turnout in the Commonwealth since 1990. This does not support the rhetoric of the proposal's proponents who suggest that voters are losing faith in democracy. New York State, which uses "fusion voting," continues to bemoan the fact that their voter turnout is consistently low. If "fusion voting" works so well, and New York uses fusion, then why is their voter turnout so poor?
Proponents argue that fusion will decrease the number of uncontested elections. Of 2,500 races held in New York from 1982 to 2004, only 1.4 percent saw an incumbent beaten by a challenger. "Fusion voting" does not work in New York, so why would it work in Massachusetts?
Fusion voting does not provide voters with additional choices as its proponents adamantly claim. In New York's 34 races for governor, lieutenant governor, comptroller, attorney general, United States senator, or representative in Congress, the Working Families Party (a major driving force behind Question 2) does not produce a single candidate of its own. Not one! They do, however, endorse the existing Democratic candidate 31 times.
This is the norm in New York, not the exception. This is a sad example of the proponents' idea of additional choice.
Proponents may argue that votes on their line of the ballot that are added to the winning candidate's totals will allow them to hold the winner accountable to their political platforms. Statistics taken from the Federal Election Commission prove otherwise. Hillary Clinton, in her race for the Senate in 2000, received more than 3.7 million total votes and barely over 100,000 of them came from the Working Families Party. Without those 100,000 votes, Sen. Clinton still won by a huge margin - approximately 700,000 votes. It is disingenuous of the proponents to claim that they have a stake in her victory and will be able to hold her accountable to their platforms when they did not even produce 3 percent of the total vote.
It is the commonwealth's goal to maintain a simple and efficient electoral process that encourages voter participation. A No vote will avoid the problems and the confusion this proposal would cause if instituted.
Rep. Anthony Petruccelli, D-Boston, is the Chairman of the Joint Committee on Election Laws in the Massachusetts House of Representatives.
