Primary backlash fuels drive for I-872

By Susan Gilmore
Seattle Times staff reporter

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive Most read articles Most e-mailed articles

So many voters flooded elections offices with complaints that many observers figured the proposed primary revamp on the Nov. 2 ballot would be an easy sell.

Right along with all the anti-primary fervor, though, critics of I-872 have continued to make their case. They warn that a primary in which the top two finishers emerge to run in the general election — even if they are from the same party — could disenfranchise minor-party candidates, and even some major-party candidates in parts of the state.

If voters approve, Washington would be the second state in the country, with Louisiana, to allow candidates from the same party to compete in the general election.

Sponsored by the Grange, which proposed the original blanket primary 70 years ago, I-872 grew out of a federal Court of Appeals ruling that outlawed the state's popular system after the state's political parties complained that it violated their First Amendment right to free association.

The Legislature approved a "top-two" replacement, but that was partially vetoed by Gov. Gary Locke.

Locke, instead, put in place a primary system used by nine other states, in which voters on Sept. 14 were required to select a party on the ballot and, in partisan races, vote only for candidates in that party.

No record was kept of their party choice; if voters didn't mark a party on their consolidated ballots in King, Snohomish and four other counties, their votes weren't counted.

The initiative says the primary is a procedure "for winnowing candidates" and each voter can choose a candidate without any limitation based on party affiliation — much like the old blanket primary. "Any party preferences will be shown for the information of voters only and may in no way limit the options available to voters," the initiative states.

I-872, the Grange insists, is the best way to uphold the traditions of the now-defunct blanket primary.

"We've got to do it. It's our legacy," said Terry Hunt, Grange president.
 
Blanket primary

But voters should not think of the Grange initiative as identical to the blanket primary, which is dead, say opponents, including Locke and former governors John Spellman and Mike Lowry.

"A lot of people were unhappy with losing the blanket primary," Lowry said. "They look at this as an answer."

Spellman points out that had a top-two primary been in effect when he won the governor's race in 1980, he wouldn't even have made it out of the primary because two Democrats received more votes than he did.

Supporters of the initiative, primarily the Grange, Secretary of State Sam Reed and former Gov. Dan Evans, have raised far more money than opponents — $245,000 to $32,000 — and state party officials, who oppose the measure, say they are putting their campaign money into other races.

"My emphasis is on electing Republicans, not defeating the Grange," said state GOP Chairman Chris Vance. "We're not running the anti-872 campaign."

Here are the key issues being raised about I-872:

• The advancement of the top-two candidates to the general-election ballot would eliminate virtually all third-party candidates from the general-election ballot.

This is the biggest complaint from the League of Women Voters, which opposes the initiative.

"We want to encourage people to run. If you're a third-party candidate, why bother," said Judy Golberg, state league president.

"Goodbye to all small parties, and goodbye, in some cases, to one of the major parties," said Liz Pierini, who represented the league at a recent candidate forum. "Small parties give us rich ideas."

During a news conference in Seattle on Sunday, presidential candidate Ralph Nader came out against I-872.

Initiative sponsors concede it may be harder for minor candidates to reach the general-election ballot, but they say it wouldn't be impossible.

"Sure, this makes it more difficult," said Don Whiting, a former assistant secretary of state now working for the Grange.

However, he said in four legislative races in 2002, third-party candidates would have advanced — two Green Party members, one Libertarian and one Independent — but in most cases that's because some races didn't draw candidates from the two major political parties.

It's unclear what will happen to the minor parties should I-872 pass. In previous elections, minor-party candidates appeared on the primary ballot and if they received 1 percent of the vote they qualified for the November ballot.

But during the last legislative session, lawmakers crafting a new primary law also changed the rules for minor-party candidates, eliminating them from the primary ballot. To appear on the general-election ballot, minor-party candidates now have to obtain signatures and hold conventions.

It's unclear whether I-872 would eliminate that provision, said Whiting, because the initiative was drafted before the Legislature changed the primary rules.

Third-party candidates

The Washington Policy Center, a nonpartisan think tank in Seattle, reported in 2000 that 180,000 voters cast their votes for third-party candidates.

"To some people, third parties merely clutter the ballot, diverting attention from the major party candidates who have a realistic chance of election," according to a center analysis of the initiative. "To others, they represent alternative voices and philosophies not expressed by the more established parties and, therefore, strengthen democracy."

The center said these candidates would be eliminated from the ballot in a primary, except in rare cases, and the ability of a minor party to graduate to major-party status, as the Libertarian Party did in 2000 by winning 5 percent of the vote in the general election "would be virtually foreclosed."

• You could have two Republicans or two Democrats on the general-election ballot, leaving voters of the opposite parties no choices.

That could happen, both sides acknowledge. But would it necessarily be bad?

Locke says it would. "This fundamentally will limit the choices you have in the general election," he said, pointing out that Democrats in Eastern Washington get 40 percent to 45 percent of the votes and they would be disenfranchised with a top-two primary system.

The Grange and Reed say the top vote-getters should go on the general-election ballot because that's who the voters want, regardless of party.

Primaries studied

The Secretary of State's office studied primaries over the past 10 years and found of the 676 legislative races, 25 would have advanced two Republicans or two Democrats to the general election, or 3.5 percent. Of those 25 races, 13 would have had two Republicans and 12 two Democrats.

Whiting said he was surprised the Republican Party fought the blanket primary because, in last month's primary, 58 percent of the voters statewide chose a Democratic ballot. That, he said, could bode poorly for Republicans under a top-two system and could upset the balance in the Legislature.

"Parties will have to recruit candidates with broad public support and run campaigns that appeal to all voters," says I-872 campaign material.

• And what happens if it passes? Still unclear, but both sides expect the issue to be back in court.

Vance, with the Republican Party, said the parties would be able to ignore the initiative and hold conventions to pick their candidates for the ballot.

Whiting, of the Grange, said the parties would need special legislative authority to hold nominating conventions. "Absent of that, they have no authority," he said.

"The Boy Scouts, the bridge club, anyone could hold nominating conventions."

But, Locke said, "the parties have threatened to nominate by convention, so that would be even less reason to vote," he said. "872 offers false promises."

Other states are looking at a top-two primary. It's on the California ballot this year, a state where the blanket primary also was thrown out by the courts.

Susan Gilmore: 206-464-2054 or sgilmore@seattletimes.com