Two competing measures on Arizona’s ballot will allow voters to pick whether the state will keep its existing partisan primary system in place or opt for something brand new.
Proposition 140 would create an open system that gives every voter the same primary ballot, regardless of political affiliation. It would get rid of the existing partisan primary system, in which voters receive a ballot associated with their political party. Under that system, independents can only participate by requesting a Democratic or Republican ballot.
Chuck Coughlin, with the Prop. 140 campaign, said the state’s current primaries make it easier for extreme candidates from both parties to advance to the general election and don’t treat all voters equally, especially the registered independents who make up a third of the electorate.
He argued Republicans and Democrats both oppose his measure because it threatens their monopoly.
“I would think most Arizona voters are familiar with the trouble that we have today as voters of voting for the lesser of two evils,” Coughlin said. “We don't like any of the candidates particularly well. And so, we want to create a system where those candidates are responsive to a majority of the electorate, not to one party or the other.”
The vast majority of candidates are essentially elected in primaries, because they either aren't running in competitive general elections, or are simply the only candidates running for a given office.
That gives the small fraction of voters who turn out in primaries – only about 31% of Arizona voters cast ballots this year – disproportionate influence, Coughlin said.
“So effectively what we're doing is allowing 35% of the electorate to make 80% of our electoral decisions. Doesn't make sense,” Coughlin said.
Coughlin cited the Founding Fathers’ desire that the country not turn into two inextricably opposed parties forgetting about larger interests.
“The person who I came to Arizona to work for was John McCain, and his statement which attracted me to him was ‘country over party,’” he said. “We just don't have that anymore. We've been consumed by partisanship.”

But not everyone thinks scrapping the existing system is a panacea to increase voter turnout or encourage participation by independents.
That’s why Republican lawmakers referred a competing measure to the ballot. If approved, Proposition 133 would add the partisan primary system already in place in state law to the state Constitution, which would make it more difficult to scrap.
Republican Rep. Austin Smith (R-Wittmann), who sponsored the measure, and several other lawmakers who supported the measure did not respond to requests for comment.
There’s also an active campaign, led by Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb and former Arizona Supreme Court Justice Andrew Gould, trying to convince voters to reject Prop. 140, the open primaries measure.
Gould fundamentally disagrees with Coughlin that the two-party system is a problem. On the contrary – he said having two large parties forces ideas to aggregate under those tents.
“Maybe you want to look at winning hearts and minds and understanding what's driving that in the first place rather than just trying to rig the system to reach a result that you're more comfortable with,” Gould said.
He argued the Legislature could make alternative changes to increase primary turnout and motivate independents to participate. That includes moving the primary up to April when more residents are in-state; lowering the signature requirement for independents to get on the ballot; and mailing independents ballots automatically instead of making people request them.
And Gould disputed the argument that independents are predominantly moderate voters.
“I think if the idea is that you want to bring people to the middle, breaking down a two-party system into a multi-party system doesn't accomplish that, it just splinters people more,” Gould said.
Gould said his first objection to Prop. 140 is that it’s too confusing. Secondly, he says it will mandate ranked-choice voting, or a system in which more than two candidates advance to the general election and voters rank the candidates in order of preference.
If one candidate doesn’t get 50% of the vote in the first round of voting in the general election, the election goes to a next round, with the lowest vote-getter eliminated. If a voter’s first-choice candidate gets eliminated, the candidate they ranked next-highest gets their vote.
Ranking several candidates means it’ll take longer for people to vote and for results to be tallied, Gould argued.
“So, as long as you have to start scanning the votes on Election Day, after all the ballots are in so that slows things down,” he said.

Coughlin insists that’s not necessarily the case, because Prop. 140 allows lawmakers to choose how candidates advance to the general election. That could be ranked-choice voting, or a top-two primary election that will result in a more familiar general election featuring two candidates.
Gould said the confusion created by the proposition would just fuel the flames of election conspiracy theories that already run rampant in Arizona, questioning what would happen when a party gets upset that their candidate didn’t win under the new system.
He also estimated it’ll cost millions to educate voters about a ranked-choice system and to reconfigure election workers’ equipment and training.
Confusion over both Props. 140 and 133 could impact how voters cast their ballots.
Republican consultant Bob Charles said whichever campaign is the least confusing has the best shot at success.
“Because a confused voter is not going to vote on the contest at all,” Charles said. “The majority of them will just say, ‘Hey look, I don't know which one is which; I’m going to trust the experts that are following these things to cast their ballots for me.’”
He said the campaign that best communicates its mission in a short and digestible way has the best chance to win at the ballot box.
“If you can condense it to a bumper sticker then, yeah, I think you got a chance,” Charles said. “Whether that bumper sticker is accurate and true or not? That’s up to the campaign and the members organizing the campaign to decide.”
A number of scenarios could play out depending on the results of the election. For instance, if neither proposition passes – or only Prop. 133 passes – then the existing partisan primary system will remain in place.
And if both conflicting propositions pass, then the measure that receives the most votes will become the law of the land.