Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.
TESTIMONY
Testimony by Karen Wharton on the role of money and community engagement in elections
1:55:21
·
3 min
Karen Wharton, a member of the public, testifies against open primaries, arguing that they would amplify the power of money in elections.
She posits that in a crowded field, only the candidates with enough money to get their name out will rise to the top.
She also criticizes the commission for not engaging enough with communities of color, noting that the hearing's timing made it difficult for people involved in get-out-the-vote efforts to attend.
- Wharton argues that in a crowded open primary, candidates with the most money will have a significant advantage.
- She criticizes the commission for a lack of engagement with grassroots communities and communities of color.
- She points to the increased turnout in the recent closed primary as evidence that the problem is a lack of engagement, not the primary system itself.
- She states that data from California shows that open primaries have had a negligible improvement on voter turnout.
Karen Wharton
1:55:21
evening, everyone.
1:55:22
Good evening, commissioners.
1:55:24
Thank you so much for the opportunity to testify.
1:55:27
I do have, prepared, testimony here, but I think I'm gonna just go off script a little bit and answer some of the questions that I think were asked earlier but not answered.
1:55:39
Firstly, I think the question was asked, well, how would money how would big money, have a role in this?
1:55:45
What role would big money have?
1:55:47
Well, we can just look at this last closed election where there were, like, 15 fourteen, fifteen candidates.
1:55:55
How many of you remember the names of those people?
1:55:58
But you do remember the ones who spent oodles and, you know, gazillion billion money so that they can rise on top to the top.
1:56:08
Perhaps, there were some candidates who number set number seven, number 10, who is really good, but because of the lack of money, we don't know that person's name.
1:56:18
So now if we were to have 15 people on an open ballot, you know, open primary, jungle primary, I don't think I think that that's where money is going to come into play, and we will find that only those with big money who is backed by money will rise to the top.
1:56:38
Number that's the first thing.
1:56:40
The second question, I think a question was asked or or a comment was made.
1:56:46
We've been here for we've had these hearings, and so many people came out and testified in favor of open primaries.
1:56:54
I agree.
1:56:55
I saw some of those.
1:56:57
Many of those people who testified did not look like me.
1:57:02
I'm really pleased to see today that there is a much more diverse audience here.
1:57:08
And I think that it's a failure on your part, I'm sorry, that you did not and are not engaged in communities, right, grassroots communities, communities of color, my community.
1:57:22
You have you had a hearing the day before elections, primary elections the last time.
1:57:27
You're having another hearing the day after, a long weekend.
1:57:32
Right?
1:57:33
Where were we?
1:57:34
Where were people the day before elections?
1:57:37
They were trying to to to to get to GOTV.
1:57:42
That's why they weren't here.
1:57:44
And we saw the results of that.
1:57:46
We saw that without open primaries, we were able to increase turnout, particularly amongst the young.
1:57:54
So what does that tell me?
1:57:55
It tells me that it's the problem is not the lack of open primaries.
1:58:00
The problem is that we're not engaging people properly.
1:58:04
We're not engaging citizens.
1:58:06
So that's what we need to do.
1:58:07
You can have every open primaries.
1:58:10
You can have top two, top four.
1:58:13
California system has shown negligible improvement.
1:58:18
Negligible.
1:58:18
I've been hearing people testify, oh, it's gonna improve turnout.
1:58:22
So I went on the California's website, and that is simply not true.
1:58:27
Right.
1:58:28
Thank you so much.
Richard R. Buery Jr.
1:58:29
Appreciate it.