The political parties’ right to free association shouldn’t amount to a free pass. But it does. The Feb. 19 primary is financed by the state and counties and yet voters are required to play by party rules, declaring party allegiance where perhaps none exists.

Voters must mark a party check box on their ballots for their presidential primary votes to count. Even then, in the case of the Democratic ballot, votes cast amount to nothing more than a beauty contest, as the Democrats don’t use the primary’s results in determining their chosen candidate. They choose to rely entirely on the outcome of the Feb. 9 caucuses instead.

But back to those ballots. The Democratic Party oath reads: “I declare that I consider myself to be a Democrat and I will not participate in the nomination process of any other political party for the 2008 Presidential election.” The Republican oath reads: “I declare that I am a member of the Republican Party and I have not participated and will not participate in the 2008 precinct caucus or convention system of any other party.”

The parties are clearly instructing voters to stick with the same party for both today’s caucuses and the Feb. 19 primary. There isn’t a law forbidding citizens from switching, and the local elections office assures it won’t be out policing such matters, but being a Democrat for the purposes of the caucus and a Republican for the primary (or vice versa) would clearly be dishonest.

In independent-minded Washington, people who truly “consider” themselves to be a Democrat or are willing to declare themselves “a member” of the Republican Party are probably few and far between. Sure, a lot of people lean one way or another. But the parties have been disappointed time and time again. Declaring allegiance to one just doesn’t feel right to many voters.

But there they are, on the Feb. 19 ballot, those party declaration check boxes. They stare us down and force us to go steady with a political party if we want to play a role in deciding who runs for president in 2008.

Why even have a primary?

I agree with court decisions saying parties have a right to freely associate and thereby exclude non-party types from their nominating procedures. But I still can’t get over the fact that Washingtonians are required to pay for the parties’ semi-private affair. And I wonder if a presidential primary is worth having at all in Washington.

Tim Likness, Clark County elections supervisor, says the state has estimated its cost for the primary at $10 million. For the county’s part, running the election will cost between $275,000 and $300,000. The parties’ cost to have an election that requires voters to play by their rules or miss out? Not a dime.

That’s a hefty bill for taxpayers, especially when one considers that a vote for a Democrat doesn’t even count for the purposes of selecting a candidate. The state Democrats will not be allocating any delegates to their national convention based on the results of the Feb. 19 vote. Republicans will use the results to allocate 51 percent of the delegates to their national convention. (The other 49 percent is determined by today’s caucus results.)

We haven’t always had an expensive primary that amounts to nothing for Democrats and 51 percent for Republican voters. The state’s primary came along via initiative proposal in 1988 and was adopted by the Legislature in 1989. The primary was used in 1992, 1996 and 2000. (In 2004, the parties’ candidates were already clear, so the primary was wisely scrubbed by lawmakers.) Prior to the initiative, caucuses were used exclusively in Washington.

I doubt that the way the primary works is how people pushing for them envisioned it would work. What value is there in a primary that means nothing to one party and excludes a wide swath of people who don’t consider themselves party members?

Perhaps it is because the presidential primary was forced on them that the parties feel justified in excluding people while requiring them to pick up the tab. In any case, I think the primary is a waste of time and money and would like to see it dissolved – or paid for by the parties. Better yet, let’s dismantle the country’s two-party political system and really make the selection of presidential nominees mean something to all people.