Editorial
Don't Play Games With State Primary

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive

The state's House and Senate have made clear their preference for a replacement to the state's unconstitutional blanket primary. Gov. Gary Locke, who has coyly raised the specter of a veto, should respect that.

Both houses have approved bills to create a primary that would advance the top two vote-getters to the general election, regardless of party. Before the bill goes to the governor, the Senate still would have to concur on a House amendment that offers a Plan B in the unlikely event the top-two primary doesn't hold up to court review. The alternative would resemble the Montana primary. Voters would choose a partisan ballot; the choice would be private.

Yesterday's speculation in Olympia, however, was that the House amendment would give the governor the opportunity to veto the top-two primary section in favor of his favored Montana-style primary. A spokesman said the governor would not discuss his "strategy" until the bill hits his desk.

That is too bad, especially since the last day of the regular legislative session is tomorrow. If the governor had any impulse to ram his preference down the throats of the state's citizens — over lawmakers' best efforts — he should have been more forcefully prescriptive.

The Montana primary is not what Washington's citizens want. Before the federal courts threw out the blanket primary, voters were able to choose from all candidates on the primary ballot, regardless of party. It is not what the state's chief election officer, Secretary of State Sam Reed, wants. He has worked hard with state lawyers to ensure the top-two primary will pass constitutional muster. And, it clearly is not what the Legislature wants.

Ideally, House and Senate negotiators should find a solution that would preclude the governor's veto. One strategy might be for a November ballot referendum so voters could choose their primary. The Senate could agree with the amended bill, which would be in effect only for this September.

It would be a shame to go to those lengths to give voters what they clearly want.

Copyright © 2004 The Seattle Times Company