Let's make sure we have this right: In March, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that Washington state's new "top-two" primary election is constitutionally permissible, and may proceed. Yet lawyers for both the Republican and Democratic parties say it should not proceed because a lower court prohibited it before that court was trumped by the Supremes.
Huh?
Of course the parties hate the idea that voters - who by initiative chose the top-two primary as the best alternative to their earlier blanket primary the court's rejected - might send two members of the same party to the general election ballot. After all, they say, primaries belong to the parties, not the people who pay for them.
It was exactly that argument the nation's highest court rejected, however. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the court's majority, said lower courts' rejection of top-two represented an "extraordinary and precipitous nullification of the will of the people."
Imagine that, people getting it their way, in a democracy no less.
The party lawyers are whistling in the wind in more ways than one here. Not only is their legal argument laughable on its face, despite an appellate court's failure to lift a trial court injunction after was overruled, but this year's Aug. 19 primary election is well under way. Secretary of State Sam Reed has issued voters' pamphlets and early ballots for military and overseas voters will be mailed in about two weeks.
No matter what party lawyers say, Republican Reed said in a prepared statement, "We will stand with the voters every time."
He's not alone among elected officials, either. Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire also defied her party in supporting top-two, calling the Supreme Court authorization of it "a new day for democracy in Washington state."
Despite that, Democratic lawyer David McDonald threatens the election "will expose all of the results to challenge, potentially wasting significant taxpayer resources on elections that have to be redone." And Republican counterpart John White Jr. warns, "As we have previously advised you, this litigation is not over."
To both, most Washington voters no doubt say, "A pox on both your houses."
It is no wonder an increasing number of voters identify themselves as independents when asked their party affiliations. By telling voters their wishes take a back seat to those of the parties, party leaders are behaving more like commissars than representatives of the people. By threatening to force voters back into using the "pick a party" ballot that drew statewide disdain in 2004, they are discouraging anyone who is not yet a party activist from becoming one.
And here's the punch line: The same party leaders say the state's new primary will damage the two-party system. - J.F.