J.F. - Washington legislators' primary fix isn't last word

Washington legislators corrected a glitch in their primary election system the other day, but how voters will choose general election candidates in future election years is far from settled.

House members passed and sent to Gov. Chris Gregoire legislation scrapping the requirement that voters check the box for a particular party on their ballots. Because about 9 percent of voters failed to do that last year, even if they voted in one party only as is also required, their votes for partisan offices were not counted.

The change was worth making, but it may end up having no effect anyway, thanks to meddlesome courts.

First up is the U.S. Supreme Court's agreement to consider the so-called Top 2 primary that voters approved by initiative and federal judges rejected as a violation of political parties' rights. Under the Top 2 system, voters need not stick with one party's candidates and the two candidates with the most primary votes move on to oppose each other in the general election, regardless of their political parties.

If the nation's highest court - which previously threw out open blanket primaries like the one Washington had used since the 1930s - reinstates Top 2, Washingtonians will end up with the primary closest to what they want. But if the court sides with the Republican and Democratic parties, voters could end up with worse.

That's because some lower courts have found that even the primary Washington used last year - requiring voting in one party only - inadequately protects parties' right to exclude other than party members. Those courts say voters must register their party membership before the are permitted to help select the party's general election candidates.

A closed primary, in other words.

That is the last thing Washington voters want, but as the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled, their desires take a back seat to those of parties. Even though voters finance primary elections through their taxes, the primaries belong to parties.

Where did such a screwy notion come from? From the very justices who claim to oppose judicial activism by courts: Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. They say permitting other than party members to vote in party primaries deprives parties of their First Amendment right to free association.

If that view continues to prevail in the high court and others, Washingtonians - and eventually, residents of all other states - will find themselves voting the way voters do in eastern states where party registration is the rule.

Or, as is just as likely in many cases, not voting in primaries at all. - J.F.