I don’t know Phil Keisling, so I won’t pretend to know his motives. I do know the law of unintended consequences, so I will instead attribute all the bad results that will flow from the former Secretary of State’s so-called “Open Primary” initiative to that. Either was, it’s a terrible idea and will have disastrous effects on democracy in Oregon.

I am confident that is not Keisling’s intent.

I am far less certain about the proven bad guys in Oregon’s politics over the past two decades: Don MacIntyre (Measure 5), Kevin Mannix (Measure 11 and this year’s M), Bill Sizemore (who has time for a list?), Karen Minnis, Wayne Scott, Betsy Chase and the ragtag collection of religionists and corporatists who have done all they could to gut democracy on behalf of god and their corporate masters.

Keisling is supposed to be one of the good guys, one of those who trusts the people to take care of themselves through direct and representative government. Yet he apparently has so little faith in the ability of Oregonians to do so, he’s decided to push a ballot measure (Measure 65) that will remove most of the candidates, and all but the two major parties, from future general elections. In the vast majority of contests, should his measure pass, either a single Democrat and Republican will make the November election or two from the same party.

Goodbye Pacific Greens. Adios Constitution Party. Adieu Libertarians. Auf Wiedersehen, Socialist Workers Party. Hit the road, Working Families Party. Whatever chance you have to advance your cause under the current system — which, I fully agree, needs a whole lot of fixing — that chance will be gone unless you find a way real quick to become the #2 party in many towns and counties around Oregon.

As the kids say, Good luck on that.

The stupid part about his measure is that he focuses on the primary election as the problem. The only problem with the primary is that people who don’t belong to or support a particular party want a say in who that party’s candidates should be. This is akin to letting Ducks head coach Mike Belotti tell Beavers coach Mike Riley who should be on his team and who his starting quarterback ought to be. If it is important to someone who the Democrats pick as their candidate for an office, that person can register as a Dem: it’s free, it’s quick, and it can be undone the day after the primary.

I am a strong, active Democrat. I give a lot of time, energy and money to the party. I am helping shape what the party, especially in Multnomah County, stands for, who it represents. Dozens of others are doing the same on a regular, active basis. Thousands of others donate less amounts of time and greater amount of money to the party because they believe in it and they have decided it represents their interests. All these Oregonians have declared themselves Democrats and demonstrated their commitment to the party in various ways.

And someone with no commitment at all to the party should have a say in who represents Democrats?

The Measure 65 campaign is trying to sell this as a way to give all Oregonians a right to pick candidates, but that’s never been the purpose of a primary election. It’s scary that Keisling was actually responsible for Oregon elections at one point. I’m not sure he really understood the nature of that part of his job. We do not actually elect anyone to a partisan office in the primary. Even if only one person runs in the primary, they still have to win the general election in November. The primary is a winnowing process. In some non-partisan races (city council, for example) winning over 50% of the vote gains an outright victory, but more usual is to have it serve as a means of picking the two finalists for the general election.

The critical word, the bogeyman of this whole process that has Keisling and others in such a tiswas, is “partisanship.” They claim Oregon has been gridlocked by partisan politics and the only way to unlock us is to eliminate partisanship from the system. We are supposed to trust that by passing this measure, somehow everyone will lose every partisan bone in their body and we’ll all be happy little-d democrats. Mannix won’t want to hamstring government’s abiliy to help the needy, Sizemore will give up trying to become rich through the initiative process, and Minnis will place the needs of citizens ahead of corporations.

Excuse me while I find a paperbag. The sheer nonsense of the idea has me hyperventilating.

If Oregonians want to fix what ails our democracy, turning our primaries into a mockery of representation is not the way to go. Destroying the opportunities of third parties, which is inevitable under this measure, is heinously undemocratic. We have fixes that not only allow parties the independence to select their own nominees but strengthen the voice of those in smaller parties and those who choose to be non-aligned. Instant run-off voting, voter-owned elections, same-day registration and the continuation of vote-by-mail all achieve what Keisling’s measure would destroy: truer representation in our democracy.

Phil Keisling does, I am certain, have good intentions. This measure betrays those intentions. Seeking to cure the “evil” of partisanship, it gives even greater power to those who can raise money and use their clout. Trying to bring more people into the primary elections, it drives far more out of the general election. Keisling’s intentions may be good, but his results will be catastrophic.

Think about this: The Democrats and Republicans should prosper under this measure. They’ll be able to carve up the state and keep challengers easily at bay. Yet both oppose it. We may have self-serving motives in many ways, but the common opposition to this measure speaks not of the desire to consolidate power but the recognition that Keisling’s M 65 will bring such harm to Oregon’s democratic process that no one will come out ahead.

There really are things worse than partisanship. Phil Keisling is proving that.