ballots

New Jersey’s lack of competitive primaries was one of many negative consequences of the county line primary ballot. Candidates who did not receive preferential ballot positions on the county line tended to drop out, leading to choiceless primaries reminiscent of elections in the former Soviet Union.

Political analyst Julia Sass Rubin, a professor at Rutgers University who has studied the county line’s effects, argues that while the change is a step toward fairness, party chairmen retain significant sway. “The line’s removal weakens their ability to directly control ballot placement, but these leaders still command loyalty, fundraising networks, and grassroots operations,” Rubin said. “They’ve lost a tool, not their toolbox.”

“The fact that so many people are choosing not to go through the process really highlights just how powerful the county line itself is in determining who wins the primary, putting aside all that other stuff,” said Julia Sass Rubin, a Rutgers professor whose research was cited in overturning the line. “The candidates feel like they can afford to do this now. They don’t have to drop out if they’re not the favorite daughter or son, and they don’t have to go through the process of getting endorsed.”

“The sad thing is that in New Jersey, for the most part, our politicians — especially at the legislative and county level — they don’t know what campaigning means,” said Julia Sass Rubin

“Anything they’re doing, they’re doing to maintain some favoritism for them, some advantage on the ballot, which means it’s not a fair ballot,” said Rutgers Professor Julia Sass Rubin, whose research was cited in overturning the county line. “The point of the ballot is to have a fair way for voters to indicate their preference.”

“The [elected] position would be at the top; there would be the names of all the candidates beneath that,” said Rubin. “It would be clear visually for people to look at it and understand what the position is, how many people they should vote for.

“Do you want a horrible ballot, or do you just want a terrible ballot, I guess is what you’re asking me,” Rubin replied to Barlas. “I would say, let’s go for a fair ballot.”

“Anything that’s not a clean ballot in terms of just a list of candidates in an office block style — nothing differentiating them — is not ideal,” said Julia Sass Rubin, a Rutgers associate professor who has done extensive research on the ballot design’s impact.

“I think it’s still a very unfair ballot,” Rubin said. “I would say let’s go for a fair ballot.”