Thumb on the Scale: Analyzing Jersey’s County Line
In the primary between Andy Kim and Tammy Murphy, we see a progressive challenger taking on an establishment candidate. While this story is becoming as old as time, New Jersey’s politics have changed the entire dimension of the story. Due to ballot structure and party organization, it allows political parties to give an advantage to their supported candidate. How large is this advantage? In past elections, winning this advantage could lead to a 20-plus swing to the endorsed candidate. In close races, this advantage is the difference between winning and losing. Due to the structural advantages associated with the “County Line”, progressives and Kim’s supporters are calling for an end to this system. While in its current state, the County Line allows the corrupt to keep and give power, the County Line is only the symptom of the disease and not the cause.
Before we continue with criticizing the County Line, it is important to define the County Line and describe what purpose it serves. The County Line gives a beneficial position to candidates endorsed by the County’s Political Party on the ballot. In nearly all of New Jersey’s County, the ballot is designed wherein the candidates are listed in columns and the office they are running for are in rows (see below). Having the County Line not only gives a better appearance with a filled-out column, but it also prevents candidates from being in “ballot Siberia”. While each county has its own rules on how the County Line is won, most of the counties either allow the county committee members or a few select members to vote on the winner. This is, understandably, seen as unfair to those on either the “outside” of this system or when the process is seen as “rigged”.
But, there is a positive impact of having the County Line. The advantage, in theory, is that the party screens the candidates. By screening the candidates, the hope is that unacceptable candidates are filtered out of the system before they are able to win the primary and the best candidates win without an expensive primary fight. While this is not always the case, having a screening process should improve the odds of preventing unsuitable candidates in the general election. Screening also allows candidates to select the “best” candidate which would give the party the best odds of winning in November. Without the County Line, resources a candidate has becomes more important and the primaries become more ruthless and expensive. With the County Line, candidates of better quality could make their case and primaries tend to be less competitive. Thus, improving the party’s odds of winning in November.
The advantages only work if the system and those who control the system are fair and just. Due to this, it makes sense why this is an outcry when the Governor’s wife won the most important endorsements of the biggest County Lines. This also assumes that the parties can select the best candidates for higher office. In politics, one finds that failing upwards is common and that the candidates with the most connections win the county line. Due to this, the County Lines are used to reinforce a corrupt political machine, make the primaries ineffective, and lead to dissatisfaction in the general election. But, the County Line is just a tool for the political elite. The political elite has a myriad of options when deciding elections and legally could put their thumb on the scale. The issue is not the County Line is corrupt but there is no challenge to the corrupt system.
It is clear the primary system of the two-party system does not have the confidence of the American people. Since incumbents and the political elite have such large advantages, it makes the primary races a de facto rubber stamp. This would make the general election even more important, but the general election is now voting for the candidate of the lesser evil and both parties indulge themselves in such a corrupt system. If you want to get rid of the corruption associated with the County Line, the only way forward is to eliminate the two-party system. While the supporters of the major parties have a hard time stomaching voting for the opposite major party, they will have less resistance if they could vote for an alternative party without sacrificing their vote. To do this will require a change in how our elections are conducted, but doing so would be the best method to combat the corruption rife in the system.
If the political elite wants to maintain their corrupt manners when there are viable contenders, they will be punished at the ballot box. This in turn will force the political parties to use the County Line in a manner that helps the best candidate instead of the candidate with the best connections. It will force the parties and politicians to work for the people instead of themselves. The County Line is just a tool where the powerful are able to keep their power. Without the County Line, the powerful still have other tools. If one wants to kneecap those with power, one must strike at the core of the system and make elections competitive. Eliminating the County Line will not make elections competitive, changing the election system will.
