Time for party officials to say "Uncle"

It's like a World Wrestling Federation match that won't end.

The state GOP, Democrats and Libertarians have revived their anti-populist tag team to drag Washington voters back into the federal ring and stomp the nonpartisan primary. That is despite the U.S. Supreme Court's 7-2 smackdown last month of the parties' efforts to kill the so-called top-two primary, which voters approved handily in 2004.

On May 5, the state parties will argue before a federal judge against Washington's new state and local primary, set to debut in August. They are posturing, arguing the new primary violates their rights in, gee, all kinds of other ways that weren't addressed by the Supreme Court case. As they say on the circuit, how kayfabe — a derivative of the pig Latin for "fake."

The parties have no one to blame but themselves. Their lust for control over voter choices and their serious miscalculation of Washington citizens' tolerance for being pushed around have landed them in a pin where they have less control than ever.

Now it's time for elected Republicans and Democrats — you know, leaders actually beholden to citizens — to stand up to party officials — and tell them once and for all: Butt out. Go home. Move on.

After all, more than a few electeds found themselves defending party control freaks to angry voters during campaign doorbelling.

For almost 70 years, Washington voters had the choice among all candidates in the old blanket primary, with the top vote-getter of each party advancing to the general election. But the parties successfully sued, saying the blanket violated their rights to select their own standard-bearers.

The Washington Grange championed the successful Initiative 872 so voters could regain control over the primary. Under the voters' primary, the two candidates who receive the most votes qualify for the general-election ballot even if both are members of the same party. Candidates can state which party they most closely identify with — much in the way U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut ran as an independent but said he would organize with the Democrats once elected.

But the parties sued again, prevailing in U.S. District Court and before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, only to run aground before the U.S. Supreme Court. The high court's ruling paved the way for the state to have its first top-two primary in August, and Chief Justice John Roberts even drafted a concurring opinion that laid out a map for how to run the top-two primary without running afoul of the Constitution.

The parties clearly are having trouble moving on. They are back before the federal judge, with whom seven of nine U.S Supreme Court justices disagreed, to try again to stop the voters' primary.

On what could be a more constructive path, the state Democratic Party is planning local conventions to nominate official party candidates, and the state GOP is considering the idea. Nominated candidates will be able to use those endorsements by party activists in their voters pamphlet statement and in advertising — kind of like nods from unions, community organizations or newspaper editorial boards.

Good for them.

Apparently, state Democrats especially prefer this type of grass-roots candidate selection, judging from how they are selecting delegates to the national convention. The party refused to acknowledge Democratic voters in Washington's Feb. 5 presidential primary, opting instead to base 100 percent of delegate selection on caucus meetings. (The state GOP is basing its delegates to the presidential nominating convention on results from the caucus and primary results equally.) Democratic Party officials insisted national rules prevented them from using results from both the primary and the caucus.

Funny, but Texas Democrats were able to. I was at a meeting with editorial writers from newspapers in Dallas and Fort Worth on March 4, the day of Texas' hybrid prima-caucus. No, it wasn't controversial.

Clearly, state party officials do not have the best interests of Washington citizens at heart. But elected officials who have some pull with the parties should. Since party officials can't seem to stop themselves, party leaders who actually have a relationship with citizens and a responsibility to them ought to put their own tag team together to stop this destructive wrestling match.

Kate Riley's column appears regularly on editorial pages of The Times. Her e-mail address is kriley@seattletimes.com; for a podcast Q&A with the author, go to Opinion at seattletimes.com