Local Parties Say Top Two Primary Impedes Choice
Rachel Cavanaugh
News Editor
The Republican and Democratic Parties alike voiced concern this week about Washington’s newly enacted Top Two primary system, which they say could threaten the democratic process.
In Klickitat County and District 4, party heads denounced the change, which becomes effective for the first time in the August 19 primary.
Under the new system, the top two vote-getters in state primaries advance to the general election, regardless of party affiliation. That means Washington’s November ballot could have two republicans or two democrats without an opponent from another party.
“I’ve been in politics for 40 years and this takes the cake,” said Sally Jackson, Democratic Chairwoman for Legislative District 4. “This is insanity.”
“The primary system was absolutely fine as far as I’m concerned,” she said.
“The Top Two destroys the party system,” said Herb Hardin, Republican State Committeeman for Klickitat County. “When you don’t have a choice of two parties being represented, you have no choice of the philosophies being imposed on you or the party you are voting for — and that’s wrong.”
Yet Secretary of State Sam Reed and Attorney General Rob McKenna, two proponents behind the new system, say the opposite is true.
According to the politicians, who posted ballot language for the system Friday, the new model allows voters greater freedom on the ballot. They say it enhances democracy.
Reed called the philosophy of the system, which applies only to the state primary (not the presidential race), the “core of Washington’s political heritage.”
“Doesn’t it make sense the two most popular people running for an office get to face off in November?” said Reed’s Communications Director, David Ammons this week.
“Typically, you’ve been resolving those races in the primaries in the state and now the race will continue into November and you’ll get a stronger, longer voting,” Ammons said.
Last month, Attorney General Rob McKenna voiced similar opinions in a press release:
“This ‘People’s Choice’ primary gives voters the freedom to select the top two candidates to proceed to the general election ballot, without interfering with the parties’ ability to nominate or support their preferred candidate.”
The Top Two push began in 2000 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled “blanket” primaries unconstitutional. Historically, Washington has been one of the few states to have an “open” or “blanket” primary, where voters do not have to file or declare party affiliation.
According to proponents, many Washington voters saw the change as an infringement on these long-held rights. One of the key citizens groups involved in the push was the Washington State Grange.
The Top Two system, Ammons said, was a response to those voters. The system maintains open primaries while staying in a legal framework.
“The political goal was to try to get as close to a blanket primary as we could…but the Supreme Court had already said you can’t do that [with the old system].”
Yet some said they are concerned the system will lead to counties and regions finding themselves with one-party tickets over and over again.
“In all probability, democrats won’t have a candidate to vote for in the eastern part of the state and republicans won’t have a candidate to vote for in the western part of the state,” said Hardin, noting he was not speaking on behalf of the Republican Party.
In Klickitat County, for example, both parties agreed republicans would likely see an advantage under the new system, while in King County, democrats would pull ahead.
Yet Ammons said that scenario is nothing new from the current model.
“That is the price of getting the wide open crossover voting for the voters,” said Ammons.
He also noted the system is ideal for non-partisan seats, which fill up much of the state elections ballots. Positions like commissioners, judges, mayors, and superintendents are often not party-affiliated.
Hardin, however, said it mars democratic principles:
“We are a party system and have been a two-party system since Lincoln,” said Hardin. “One of the goals of the Founding Fathers was to prevent the dictatorship of the majority and protect the rights of the minority.
“What the Top Two system does, in my opinion, is abandon that principle.”
Dwight Pelz, Washington state chairman for the Democratic Party, agreed:
One of the concerns about the wide open primary system is the potential for people to vote against candidates rather than for them, a practice generally discouraged by politicians.
The tactic was seen this week in the presidential race when some republicans reportedly voted for Hillary Clinton, in an attempt to strengthen John McCain’s candidacy.
Democrats have used similar strategies in the past.
The new ballots will not list candidates by their party. Instead, a “preference” will be listed. For example, a republican would be listed as: John Smith (Prefers Republican Party), and likewise for Democrats.
If a candidate does not state a preference, it will be listed as: John Smith (States No Party Preference).
Initial ballot language was released mid-April and the Secretary of State posted official language at the office’s website Friday.
Farmers should convert carefully, Ag says
The Department of Agriculture warned farmers this week against converting grasslands into crop production fields.
In the wake of escalating rice and grain prices, officials said, some farmers have begun looking to expand cropland acreage. Yet according to the agency’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), they should “think carefully” about that decision.
Paul Scales, NRCS state resource conservationist, said if producers do plant crops on land that has been idle, it is critical to develop a comprehensive conservation plan.
Techniques to protect natural resources and maintain soil health are imperative.
“Some of that land might have been out of crop production for 20 years, the conservationist said in a written statement. “During that time the soil quality has improved, erosion has been reduced, and water quality has been protected.
“Without proper conservation, those 10 or 20 years of progress could be undone in as little as one year.”
At present, Washington’s largest source of idled farm acreage is the 1.5 million acres of land enrolled of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), administered by the USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA).
Typically, landowners have converted those acres into grass in exchange for cash payments, yet those CRP contracts are quickly expiring.
Rod Hamilton, FSA program chief, said 380,000 acres of CRP land were either in contracts that had expired in 2007 or would by 2010. Of the 221,000 acres of contracts that expired in 2007, about 85 percent were back in CRP.
That, he said, leaves nearly 31,000 acres of land in expiring or expired contracts subject to landowner decisions about what to do with them.
In addition, about 53,000 acres will no longer be eligible for CRP in counties that were given a waiver to exceed the CRP acreage cap. That waiver is not being extended.
Scales said grazing systems may be a good alternative for some landowners because they typically have less impact on the environment than cropping systems and can help maintain twildlife benefits. Grassland, he said, can also be profitable.
“A well-managed grazing enterprise can compete economically with crop production on many Washington farms,” Scales said.
There are also financial costs associated with the conversion, he said, like the cost of fuel, pesticides, herbicides, additional time and labor demands, and getting pH, nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium levels where they need to be.
He recommended producers look at options for additional income like hay production or fees received for hunting rights.
“Keeping land in permanent vegetation is the best way to protect natural resources and maintain recreational benefits,” Scales said. “But if landowners decide that it’s best for them to convert the grassland to crops, we encourage them to convert in ways that will have the least negative impact on the environment.”
Comment period open for Harvest Wind energy project 4 mi. north of Roosevelt
Comments are requested on the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a wind energy project submitted to the Klickitat County Planning Department.
The Department has issued a determination of significance for the Harvest Wind energy project, proposed to be constructed 21 miles east of Goldendale and four miles north of Roosevelt. The project, which would lie entirely within the Klickitat County energy overlay zone, will erect 55 wind turbine generators and associated infrastructure, which includes access roads, transmission lines and an operations and maintenance building. The site encompasses approximately 6,770 acres.
Any person or agency may appeal the determination of significance to the Board of County Commissioners. Appeals shall state the specific basis for the appeal and errors that are asserted. The Board will schedule a hearing, should appeals be filed. Appeal form and fee of $175 is due at the Planning Department by 5 p.m. on May 16.
Comments on the scope of the EIS will be accepted until 5 p.m. on May 22, also at the Planning Department. Alternatives, mitigation measures, probably significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other required approval can be addressed in the comments.
Harvest Wind Energy is a project of Lakeview Light and Power and Public Utility District No. 1 of Cowlitz County.
|
