Massachusetts voters have turned down a ballot initiative that would have abolished traditional party primaries in favor of a top-two primary system, according to preliminary results from Decision Desk HQ. With 69% of precincts reporting early Wednesday, Question 3 was failing by a margin of roughly 61% to 39%.
The proposed change, known as Question 3, would have allowed candidates from all parties to appear on the same primary ballot, with the top two vote-getters advancing to the general election. That format, often called a "jungle primary," could have resulted in two candidates from the same party competing in the general election.
Supporters argued that the current system disenfranchises independent voters and forces candidates to cater to party bases rather than the broader electorate. The measure drew backing from a diverse coalition, including the NAACP of New England, a bipartisan group of mayors, progressive organizations, and some Republicans, as reported by WBUR. It also received endorsements from former Massachusetts Governors Charlie Baker (R) and Deval Patrick (D), as well as Joshua Bekenstein, a co-founder of Bain Capital, who contributed $500,000.
The campaign in favor was largely funded by the Coalition for Healthy Democracy 2026, which poured $4 million into the effort—more than any other ballot question in the state this cycle, according to WGBH. That money helped finance advertising and outreach aimed at convincing voters that the change would increase competition and give independents a voice.
Opposition came from both major parties, including the Massachusetts Democratic Party State Committee and several unions, as well as the state Republican Party. The main opposing campaign, Voter Rights MA, was backed by the SEIU 1099, which spent $100,000 against the measure. Critics argued that the top-two system would actually reduce voter choice by making it harder for third-party candidates to qualify, and that it would lead to more costly and negative general elections.
The defeat means Massachusetts will retain its current system of partisan primaries, which have been in place since 1911. According to the office of Secretary of State Bill Galvin (D), the earlier system allowed party committees to control nominations, and the shift to primaries was intended to give voters a more direct say.
Massachusetts remains one of only three states, along with California and Washington, that use jungle primaries for statewide and congressional races—though that number will not change as a result of this vote.
This outcome aligns with a broader trend this election cycle in which voters in several states have weighed changes to their election laws. For example, North Carolina voters approved a photo ID requirement, while Arkansas voters backed a citizenship proof mandate. In contrast, Arizona voters rejected a measure that would have kept a noncitizen voting ban off the books, though that ban remains in place.
With Question 3 defeated, Massachusetts will continue to use party primaries, and the state's political landscape is unlikely to see the structural changes that proponents had hoped for. The result is a significant victory for the state's major parties and their allies, who had campaigned vigorously against the measure.
