Category: top two (Page 1 of 2)

Because you can’t kill something deader than dead.

Political divisions in the state senate. Click for larger version.

The problem with the minor parties’ argument that the Top Two primary hurts their chances is that a minor party candidate hasn’t been elected to the state legislature since the 1920s. While you could blame that on the original primary system, that system still advanced one member of each party to the general ballot, which is what they’re complaining the Top Two doesn’t necessarily do.

What changed in the 1920s to hurt minor parties was the designation by the state of “minor and major” parties. Because major parties get the gift of state paid for organizational elections (PCO elections) every two years, they have a built in grass roots advantage over minor parties.

There’s easy access to the machinery of major parties through becoming a PCO, and because they’re required by state law, most legislative districts and counties have local major party organizations. Minor parties, not so much.

It would be better for the minor party folks to worry less about getting candidates to a November ballot where they’re going to lose anyway, and worry more about the structural and organizational benefits major parties enjoy.

KUOW: Will The Top Two Primary Kill Third Parties?
Seattle Times: Third parties say top-two primary hurts their chances

Andrew from Redmond writes:

Listen, Sam, you and your best pals at the Grange created this big mess. You’ve opened the floodgates to confusion, mischief, and trickery by turning the primary into the first act of a general election where people can use the descriptor to say almost anything they like about themselves.

You have destroyed the integrity of our primary, which is supposed to enable grassroots participation – allowing a greater number of Washingtonians to join in the selection of the party nominees.

(he did the bolding)

So, if we want to allow “a great number of Washingtonians to join in the selection of party nominees,” why did we hold a caucus for the presidential nominee?

Amen brothers:

The 36th District Executive board met last Thursday and decided that the use of a handful of PCOs, some of whom were appointed, was too undemocratic a way to choose a party nominee when there were so many thousands of people interested in the political process this cycle.

Interesting note on the role of parties:

And state law does not allow nominations or endorsements by interest groups, political action committees, political parties, labor unions, editorial boards or other private organizations to be printed on the ballot.

Up until now, political parties have served a quasi-public role in elections. While they were private organizations with free association rights, the nominees that they chose appeared on the general election ballot. But, now the secretary of state has put them with other private organizations that are involved in elections.