Chief
09-27-2007, 10:23 AM
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorialsopinion/2003905819_toptwoed27.html
Next week, Washington citizens get a chance to reclaim their preference for an election primary that doesn't limit them to the candidates of one party.
The United States Supreme Court's first case on the first Monday in October will be the 7-year-old legal battle between Washington populism and state party ideology. The state's Republican, Democratic and Libertarian parties so far have prevailed in federal courts, overturning the voters' preference for a primary that permits them to vote for any candidate, regardless of party. Approved by 60 percent of Washington voters in 2004, Initiative 872 was ruled unconstitutional before it was enacted.
In their appeal, Washington citizens have something important working in their favor. The initiative's sponsor, the Washington Grange, followed U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's advice in writing its initiative. Scalia authored the court's 2000 decision that overturned California's blanket primary and ultimately led to the demise of Washington's 70-year-old blanket primary. In the blanket primaries, the top vote-getter of each party advanced.
In the ruling, Scalia suggested a primary that advanced the top two vote-getters, without regard to their party affiliation, could pass constitutional muster.
This year's case will essentially ask Scalia and his colleagues: "How did we do?"
In their briefs to the court, the political parties continue to complain that because I-872 would permit candidates to express their political preference — Republican, Democratic, etc. — it would violate the parties' First Amendment right of free association. They seem to argue that the parties themselves own the names and forget that candidates have First Amendment rights of free speech to state their preference.
Washington voters twice have expressed a desire for a populist primary. The first time was in 1934, when registered voters signed Initiative to the Legislature No. 2, urging the creation of the blanket primary. The Legislature complied.
The Supreme Court's decision will either restore the Washington's populist tradition to its primary system or set the state on a course for increasing partisanship and division.
Next week, Washington citizens get a chance to reclaim their preference for an election primary that doesn't limit them to the candidates of one party.
The United States Supreme Court's first case on the first Monday in October will be the 7-year-old legal battle between Washington populism and state party ideology. The state's Republican, Democratic and Libertarian parties so far have prevailed in federal courts, overturning the voters' preference for a primary that permits them to vote for any candidate, regardless of party. Approved by 60 percent of Washington voters in 2004, Initiative 872 was ruled unconstitutional before it was enacted.
In their appeal, Washington citizens have something important working in their favor. The initiative's sponsor, the Washington Grange, followed U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's advice in writing its initiative. Scalia authored the court's 2000 decision that overturned California's blanket primary and ultimately led to the demise of Washington's 70-year-old blanket primary. In the blanket primaries, the top vote-getter of each party advanced.
In the ruling, Scalia suggested a primary that advanced the top two vote-getters, without regard to their party affiliation, could pass constitutional muster.
This year's case will essentially ask Scalia and his colleagues: "How did we do?"
In their briefs to the court, the political parties continue to complain that because I-872 would permit candidates to express their political preference — Republican, Democratic, etc. — it would violate the parties' First Amendment right of free association. They seem to argue that the parties themselves own the names and forget that candidates have First Amendment rights of free speech to state their preference.
Washington voters twice have expressed a desire for a populist primary. The first time was in 1934, when registered voters signed Initiative to the Legislature No. 2, urging the creation of the blanket primary. The Legislature complied.
The Supreme Court's decision will either restore the Washington's populist tradition to its primary system or set the state on a course for increasing partisanship and division.