Lawyer warns Question 3 could enable corruption and voter disorientation

California candidates have advanced to general elections with under 25 percent of the vote for governor and under 20 percent for lieutenant governor under an electoral framework similar to the one proposed by Massachusetts’s Question 3.

The Mechanics of Low-Turnout Vulnerability

The Massachusetts ballot measure aims to replace party primaries with a single all-party primary and a top-two runoff.

A single all-party primary naturally creates more crowded races. Under traditional plurality voting rules, more candidates mean a lower threshold for victory. These low thresholds force voters to guess at electability rather than express honest preferences, while enabling well-funded candidates to manipulate the field by pressuring rivals or bankrolling spoilers.

Alternative Voting Systems Curb the Spoiler Effect

Social choice theory demonstrates why such electoral designs remain vulnerable. Marquis de Condorcet warned during the French Revolution that open primaries followed by top-two runoffs invite the influence of parties and corruption. If the vote splits between too many candidates, small factions can coordinate to advance candidates to the runoff.

Alternative systems like ranked-choice voting, approval voting, and score voting have successfully curbed the spoiler effect by counting how voters judge every candidate, not just their favorite.

Section 9 Allows Political Slogans on Ballots

Beyond voting mechanics, Section 9 of Question 3 introduces a distinct administrative and integrity risk. Under current Massachusetts law, any group of 50 registered voters can create a political designation. Question 3 allows these designations, which are effectively three-word slogans, to have their endorsement printed directly on the ballot with the candidate’s approval. The Yes campaign acknowledges this endorsement works like a free mailer.

Contrasting Standards Across State Lines

This low threshold contrasts sharply with states like New York, where endorsers must earn ballot lines with tens of thousands of signatures. Massachusetts bans campaigning within 150 feet of a polling place to maintain order.

Legal experts point out that Question 3 would instead turn the ballot into a crowded billboard featuring dueling endorsements from various organizations and special interest groups adopting poll-tested names, potentially disorienting voters inside the voting booth.