Lower Bucks Today

Sens. Ryan Aument (R-36) and Frank Farry (R-6) are advocating for the introduction of a primary runoff election system in Pennsylvania. They argue that this system would ensure candidates secure at least 50% of their party's support in the primary election before advancing to the general election.

Aument and Farry point out that historically, winning statewide elections in Pennsylvania requires candidates to garner majority support from their party in the primaries. Since 1976, only three candidates have won statewide elections without achieving this threshold, and in each case, their opponents also failed to secure at least 50% of the vote.

"If candidates are truly interested in winning in November, then they must first win widespread support from their party – otherwise, history shows us they lose," they stated.

The proposed bill outlines a process where if no candidate achieves at least 50% of the vote in the primary election, a second or "runoff" election would be held between the top two vote-getters. The winner of this runoff would then proceed to compete in the general election.

The senators believe this change is necessary due to low voter satisfaction and enthusiasm for current candidates. Under the existing system, a candidate can win with only a small fraction of votes. For instance, during the 2022 Republican primary for U.S. Senate, 69% of voters chose someone other than the eventual winner who then lost against John Fetterman in the general election.

"Under a primary runoff election system, successful candidates must earn the support of a majority of their party’s voters," Aument and Farry assert. "This results in stronger general election candidates with popular support."

They also contend that runoffs empower voters by providing an additional opportunity for their voices to be heard. Despite some grassroots advocates opposing this proposal as an attack on grassroots efforts, Aument and Farry disagree: "Primary runoff elections do not give an advantage to incumbents or those with more money. They only give an advantage to candidates who have the support of a majority of their party’s voters – as it should."

However, they acknowledge opposition from certain grassroots advocates who wish to retract this proposal without debate: "They want to silence any discussion of candidate quality because they believe that candidates who are rejected by most voters still deserve to win."

###