Locke implies he'll veto Louisiana-style primary

By Andrew Garber
Seattle Times Olympia bureau

	Gary Locke
	E-mail this article Print this article Search archive

Such a move appears guaranteed to ignite a political firestorm that would likely end up in court. Locke has 20 days from the end of the session, not counting Sundays, to decide.

"It totally violates the whole intent of the legislation and turns it on its head," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Finkbeiner, R-Kirkland. "What justification can he have?"

But Locke argued legislators seemed to have written the bill with a veto in mind.

After months of debate, lawmakers earlier this week approved a Louisiana-style election system to replace Washington's outlawed blanket primary. The new primary, also known as the "top two" system, would let voters cast ballots for any candidate, regardless of party, and would send the top two finishers to the general election. The legislation also stipulates that the state revert to a Montana primary if the first plan doesn't hold up in court.

Primary background The Legislature must create a new primary system because U.S. courts outlawed Washington's nearly 70-year-old blanket primary. Here are the two likely replacements: Louisiana primary, approved by state legislators: Voters could vote for candidates regardless of party affiliation, and the top two vote-getters would advance to the November general election. Montana primary, favored by Gov. Gary Locke: Voters could choose only one party's ballot, but their choice would remain secret. Each party's top vote-getter would advance to the general election. The state Republican Party has said it would sue to gain access to each voter's choice of ballot.

State law gives the governor the power to veto sections of legislation. In this case, Locke could delete the references to the Louisiana primary, leaving only the sections of the bill referring to the Montana system.

Although Locke said he hasn't decided about using his veto, "I think I'm being very clear with you where my preferences are now," the governor said at a news conference. "I keep telling you I don't like the Louisiana system and my first preference is the Montana system."

He suggested the bill was designed so that he could use his veto. "It's interesting that the (legislation) was written in a way that deliberately, I think, consciously, knowingly gives me the authority to veto out whole sections. They could have written it in a totally different way," Locke said.

Leaders in the House and Senate who support the Louisiana primary vehemently disagreed.

"He's totally wrong. Too many of us were invested in this," House Majority Leader Lynn Kessler, D-Hoquiam, said.

She and Finkbeiner said the concern was raised when the legislation was being drafted, but lawmakers decided to gamble that Locke would not use his veto.

"There's no way to write this that's veto-proof," said Finkbeiner, who contends Locke is using that argument as a way to justify a veto.

The primary fight has been a free-for-all this year with Locke, various lawmakers, the state's political parties, the League of Women Voters, and members of the state congressional delegation opposing the Louisiana option, which takes away power from the political parties.

On the other side, Secretary of State Sam Reed, former U.S. Sen. Slade Gorton, the Washington State Grange, numerous county auditors and some legislators have lobbied for the Louisiana plan, arguing it's a close cousin to the state's outlawed blanket primary.

The Louisiana plan is similar to Washington's former primary in that voters could vote for anyone they want, regardless of party. But instead of one candidate from each party advancing, only the two people with the most votes would appear on the November ballot.

In some cases, such as in heavily Democratic or Republican districts, that could pit two candidates from the same party against each other in the general election. That could not happen under the Montana primary.

Locke said he's getting calls from all sides about what he should do. "My obligation is to do what I think is in the best interest for the people of Washington to reduce legal uncertainty and to ensure that people have full choice," he said.

A veto would not necessarily diminish the prospects of lawsuits. The Grange, which supports the Louisiana-style primary, has said it will probably sue the state if Locke vetoes that part of the bill.

In addition, the state Republican Party has said it would sue, if the Montana primary is adopted, to make voters' ballot choices — tantamount to their party affiliation — public information.

Rep. Mike Armstrong, who helped craft the bill, urged Locke not to intervene.

"Our intent was to make (the bill) as veto-proof as we could," said Armstrong, R-Wenatchee. "I would hope the governor would just sign the bill and if it goes to court, so be it."

Andrew Garber: 360-943-9882 or agarber@seeattletimes.com

Copyright © 2004 The Seattle Times Company