Endorsements and editorials are made solely by the ownership of this newspaper. As is the case at most newspapers across the nation, The Spokesman-Review newsroom and its editors are not a part of this endorsement process. (Learn more.)

Editorial: Holding presidential primary good for voters

Fri., July 3, 2015

The results are in for Washington’s 2016 presidential primary, and the Republicans look like winners.

In May, we called the absence of a primary a win for both parties, anticipating that Secretary of State Kim Wyman’s bid for reforms would go nowhere. It didn’t, but that was not the end of it.

Wyman wrung $11.5 million from the Legislature so Washingtonians will be able to vote and, presumably, see more presidential contenders than would be the case if both parties stuck with the practice of selecting state convention delegates at local caucuses.

Washington Republicans learned the pitfalls of that system the hard way. In 1988, devoted conservatives packed the caucuses and sent the Rev. Pat Robertson to a national convention that overwhelmingly supported the nomination of George H.W. Bush. The Washington delegation was out of step.

State Republicans adopted a hybrid nomination process in the aftermath, with one-half of the delegates selected in the caucuses, one-half in the primary. Democrats refuse to make any change. Caucuses, party officials say, assure the nominating process will be controlled by the party faithful: those who will continue working for the candidates throughout the election process.

They also make the tired argument that members of the opposition might try to manipulate primary outcomes. At local caucuses, members of both parties should be able to spot a fake as soon as they walk in the door.

For an inclusive party, that’s a very exclusive position. Many Washington residents cannot get to the caucuses, most notably the thousands of members of the military. If someone cannot get to a caucus at the appointed hour, too bad.

Wyman notes that voter turnout for primaries is 10 times that for caucuses. But if delegate selection is not tied to primary results, they become mere “beauty contests.”

The rub against primaries is the requirement that you state your party affiliation on the ballot, and you can vote only for candidates of that party. Cross over, and your ballot is discarded. Many would rather give out a credit card number than their party allegiance.

For parties, though, knowing who voted with them can be a recruitment and fundraising bonanza. For a minority party, that can be a big incentive, and there could be a big payoff for the GOP next year.

If, as Wyman wants, the Washington primary could be set for March 8, a significant number of the GOP presidential wannabes who survive the previous week’s Super Tuesday primaries could schedule campaign stops. The more that come, the greater the potential turnout.

Unless the campaign of Hillary Clinton goes sideways, there should be more interest in the Republican primary among independent voters, maybe even some Democrats. And the Republicans would have all their names.

Democrats, of course, will have the same opportunity, but they do not show much interest in taking advantage.

Wyman has a lot of work to do convincing both parties that a March primary will work for them. It would work for voters.