Postman on Politics
Chief political reporter David Postman explores state, regional and national politics.
March 28, 2008 10:07 AM
Posted by David Postman
There may be just two weeks until the next round of litigation over Washington’s primary election. The Secretary of State’s office is working on draft rules setting out how the August top-two primary will be run.
Secretary of State Sam Reed will allow candidates to list a party preference next to their names on the ballot. But the Democratic and Republican parties will not be able to show on the ballot which candidate is their officially endorsed candidate.
Assistant Director of Elections Katie Blinn was on a teleconference with party attorneys this week to tell them what Reed planned on doing. She said it was not a very fruitful conversation and the parties remain opposed to the top-two primary. They're likely to file suits to stop the primary. Blinn told me yesterday:
As soon as we put out that draft version we’ll be back in court.
It will take at least two weeks until that draft is ready to be circulated.
Blinn sent an e-mail this week to legislative caucus staff outlining what the primary might look like. See the full e-mail after the jump:
A few of you have emailed me with questions regarding implementation of the Top Two Primary, I-872. Our current plan is to circulate some draft implementing WACs for comment and feedback by next week. The WACs that we ultimately adopt will have to be adopted by emergency rules because the normal rulemaking process takes 6 months. Candidate filing actually begins in 7 weeks, when declarations of candidacy may be accepted by mail. We are in discussions this week with the parties and the County Auditors’ Offices regarding what is feasible. Our focus will be to inform candidates that they can list on the ballot the name of a party that they prefer, and to convey to voters that this information does not mean that the party prefers that candidate. You are probably getting questions from the legislators on the filing process. Here are a few points:Points for Prospective CandidatesFile the declaration of candidacy as usual.
I will try to keep you informed as the process moves along. I apologize that it is taking me some time to respond to your email. Thanks!
- No nomination or endorsement by the party either before or after filing is required.
- Minor party and independent candidates do not have to conduct conventions or gather signatures; just file a declaration of candidacy.
- The declaration of candidacy and the ballot will list the political party that the candidate “prefers”.
- The ballot and the voters’ pamphlet will explain that the fact that a candidate expresses a preference for a particular party does not mean that the candidate is endorsed or nominated by that party, is a member of that party, or represents that party.
- Even if a candidate is nominated or endorsed by a party, that will not be specially designated on the ballot. However, the candidate is free to mention that in the voters’ pamphlet and other political advertising.
- In the event that no Democrat or Republican files for a particular race, the party can no longer fill a vacancy on the party ticket. There is no major party ticket anymore. There will only be a special filing period if no candidate files at all, which is a void in candidacy.
- If no candidate at all files for a particular race, then that race will be re-opened for a special filing period.
- Even if only one candidate files, that race will appear on the primary election ballot. (I am still checking on this one. RCW 29A.52.220 says that there is no primary in a nonpartisan race if only one or two candidates file- the race skips to the General. I don’t think that this was changed in I-872 to include partisan races.)
Assistant Director of Elections
Office of the Secretary of State
Posted by Richard Shepard
7:38 PM, Mar 28, 2008
Even though I-872 has created a nonpartisan ballot (albeit with some limited political speech on the ballot) rumor has it that the state still intends to accept candidates for precinct committee officers. I do not understand how the state can do this, or how the parties are going to know that the PCOs were elected by party members. It seems to me that the primary ballot is either partisan or it isn't. It also seems to me that §3(2) of the initiative prohibits partisan elections altogether.
Posted by evergreen_representative
9:00 PM, Mar 28, 2008
The Party of Commons will be endorsing Sam Reed for re-election as Secretary of State. I am glad that he is standing against the ridiculous idea that there should be a special designation on the ballot of which candidates are party endorsed, because it is important to the integrity of a fair and honest election that the ballot should be egalitarian with no special favors to particular candidates, which is one of the reasons why they have a lot drawing to determine the order of candidates on the ballot.
For the party chairs to threaten to continue dragging "Top 2" into the courts over technicalities, even after the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled, shows a disrespect for democracy and the will of the people, and the Party of Commons will make their defiance of the people's will an issue in this election year.
Posted by Richard Pope
12:59 AM, Mar 29, 2008
If there are only two candidates who file -- or even only one candidate who files -- an election for partisan office must be preceded by a primary in which only one or two candidates appear on the primary ballot.
RCW 29A.52.112(2) (from Section 7 of I-872) says:
"Whenever candidates for a partisan office are to be elected, the general election must be preceded by a primary conducted under this chapter."
So this allows for write-in candidates to make it to the general election, especially if only one candidate officially files.
If a party wasn't otherwise planning to run a candidate, and is upset that someone actually runs under their banner as the only avowed R or D on the ballot, they can still field a write-in candidate in the primary, and try to get that person to beat the imposter and make it to the general election
Posted by John's Son
2:13 PM, Apr 13, 2008
Barack Oboma's latest speech which everyone is commenting on seems to me to be different than all of his speeches so far.What I mean is that it neither attracts the Republican Or Democrats who are looking for and interested in improved race relations, reduced taxes or homeland security issues. All it did was to point his finger at his concern that we are gullible, that is our faith based religeons and our constitutional based rights are somehow in his opinion unimportant and not the basis of our great country.He lost my vote.
Apr 11, 08 - 05:37 PM
Washington Dems unsure of Colombia trade deal
Apr 11, 08 - 01:34 PM
Sonics fans take over Gregoire rally
Apr 11, 08 - 12:41 PM
Dave Ammons to leave AP
Apr 10, 08 - 11:03 AM
D.C. eyes Murray as Byrd ails
Apr 10, 08 - 09:06 AM
Court says state can force-feed inmates