Massachusetts voters have a chance to make cross-party endorsements legal again by voting “yes” on Question 2 this November 7.
If this ballot initiative passes, alternative political parties would have the option to show their support for a major party candidate in general elections.
In other words, the candidate’s name would appear multiple times on the ballot, once for their party and again for any third party that endorses the candidate
Votes are tallied separately, but added together for the final results.
We haven’t seen this in Massachusetts since 1912, when “big banking, steel, and railroad interests pushed the legislature to outlaw it here (and in most other states around the country) so as to protect their interests by consolidating power in the hands of the major parties,” according to the Mass Ballot Freedom Campaign.
The theory behind cross-party endorsements is that it makes the candidates more aware of (and more endebted to) constituencies that have an interest in a particular position or policy. The candidate knows exactly how much of their support comes from the third parties and, presumably, will be responsive to those parties’ particular concerns.
Supporters claim that this has made a difference in the passage of numerous pieces of progressive legislation, all the way from the minimum wage to women’s sufferage.
I don’t know whether a third party would still have to meet the 3% rule to be listed. If so, that would pretty much take the steam out of this proposal.
Also, I’m not sure that my Libertarian Party would even want to endorse a candidate from one of the majors.
At least this gives us something constructive to think about instead of the dismal gubernatorial debates and Rush Limbaugh’s trashing of Michael J. Fox.