Washington may cancel 2004 presidential primary

[jono]

Monday, September 22, 2003 · Last updated 4:04 p.m. PT
By DAVID AMMONS
AP POLITICAL WRITER

OLYMPIA, Wash. -- Washington state may cancel next year's Super Tuesday White House primary here, considering it a $6 million waste of scarce tax dollars.

Critics noted Monday that Democrats don't plan to use the results to allocate national convention delegates and that Republicans already know who their nominee will be.

The old caucus system, such as Iowa uses, should suffice, and won't cost the state a dime, they said.

Sen. Jim Kastama, D-Puyallup, is preparing legislation to suspend the election for 2004 only. He said it may require a one-day special session of the Legislature to call off the election in time to save the full $6 million.

<snip>

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/aplocal_story.asp?c...

[madrchsod]

1. so sorry

this election will be cancelled due to funding problems..fuck the process, i guess the comman man doesn`t have the right to vote for who they want to run for their party...oh i get it cause the rethugs are going down with the ship we all have to also..dam i love democracy.
shit i`m from il. and it pisses me off!!!

[regnaD kciN]

13. It isn't over "funding problems"...

Washington used to hold caucuses similar to those in Iowa to allocate delegates. Last election cycle, they put in a primary. However, they were held according to Washington's standard "blanket primary" procedure, where there is only one ballot and anyone can vote for any candidate, whether they belong to the same party or not. This contradicted the Democratic Party rules for selecting delegates (you have to be a member of the Democratic Party to vote), so it was already decided back in 2000 that the primary would only be a "beauty contest," while the delegates would continue to be chosen by caucuses.

Since then, the "blanket primary" has been declared unconstitutional, so it couldn't be used anyway. As far as I can tell, there are no laws or procedures in place here to provide for a party-affiliation-only primary, and probably not enough time before "Super Tuesday" to put them in place. So, since no one would be using them to select delegates (the Republicans did in 2000, but we all know who they're going to nominate this time), there's no real point to spend the money on a pointless election.

[otohara]

2. Already Canceled in My State

no primary vote for me.... of course if were GOP candidates we were talking about, I'm sure Gov. Owens would find the money somewhere.

[laylah]

4. Otohara

I lived in Colorado for 28 years......my grown children and ex are still there. I CANNOT believe that folks out there are allowing Owens to do this! Isn't anyone doing anything to stop this travesty??????

[PennyLane]

18. Yep!

No doubt! This just reeks of Bush & Rove!

[ScotTissue]

3. Wha?

The article says:

"Critics noted Monday that Democrats don't plan to use the results to allocate national convention delegates...."

If that's true, the election is bloody pointless. Is it true??

[jono]

5. I guess the state was overruled by the DNC

This is from farther down:


But the Democratic National Committee later told state Democrats they can't use the primary for anything more than a nonbinding beauty contest. The state party's original plan, to use the primary to pick 20 percent of the delegates and the Feb. 7 caucuses to pick the rest, would be too confusing to voters and unfair to candidates, the DNC said.

[FlemingsGhost]

6. * sniff * ... Would somebody please call the morgue.

The corpse, formerly known as "democracy," is really starting to stink up the joint.

[laconicsax]

7. I hate living here

Sure, it's a blue state, but it has the most incompetent elected officials in the country.

They need $6 million to run the election? How about axing the monorail and light rail mess that already over budget and years behind schedule?

What else is there that could bring in revenue? How about repealing Tim Eyman's dumbass initiatives?

The blanket primary was ruled unconstitutional, so this could be the first primary election in years where you have to register as Dem or Dick and only vote for your party's candidates. That would mean that the primary couldn't be freeped so to speak by dicks all getting together to vote en masse for a Dem candidate to skew the results.

I deserve a say in who my party nominates. Fuck you Kastama.

[jono]

8. FWIW,

light-rail and monorail are not state matters - light rail is regional and monorail is Seattle. Axing them will not help the state.

[davidinalameda]

9. so go to the caucuses

how hard is that?

there you'll be able to help pick the delegates

[regnaD kciN]

15. Actually, the precinct caucuses are pretty cool...

...and a good way for die-hard Democrats like most of us here to meet each other, and make a difference. I attended several, and was selected as a delegate to the next level up (county caucuses) a couple of times, and as a delegate to the state convention in 1988.

[laconicsax]

19. I'd have to drive about 90-100 miles

I'm registered at my home address, which is in Issaquah, but go to school in Ellensburg which is about 90 miles away.

[david_vincent]

11. Just moved from there

It feels so good not being forced to help underwrite Paul Allen's football team, not driving down Willows Road and seeing America's fifth most-fertile valley used for Paul Allen's golf course, not being cut off in traffic by SUV-driving narcissistic Microsoft thugs, not being forced to provide downtown parking for Nordstrom, not listening to Tim Eyman's lies on every news broadcast, not watching helplessly as every single one of my friends loses his/her job, not seeing decrepit huts being advertised at an asking price of $250,000, not driving around in the middle of the day with both the headlights and wipers on, not listening to people who think the Seattle Times is objective, not watching entire towns like Issaquah lick Bill Gates' shoes as he's reaming them, not being repeatedly ticketed by cops who are competing to win a trip to a Caribbean resort for writing the most tickets, not sitting in a miles-long gridlock caused by some idiot boy-racer who was speeding and following too closely to the guy in front, and not having the owner of the corner gas station shot to death in what was probably a gang initiation that remains unsolved and now forgotten.
And that's just off the top of my head.
Move. If I could do it, you can too.

[regnaD kciN]

14. Whine, whine, whine...

Actually, I applaud your decision to move...more space for the rest of us who actually find this one of the most livable areas of the country.

I hope you enjoy it in Idaho. Or North Dakota. Or whereever the hell else you might go to, considering you find Washington to be to crowded, urban, and gang-filled.

[dflprincess]

10. I like the caucus system

Of course, I live in a caucus state. The media hates them, just not as glamorous as a primary. There's always muttering about getting rid of the caucuses and going to a primary (this comes from both parties as well as the media, they think we'd get more attention).

Yes, the caucus system can be tedious, but it's also more issue focused and doesn't lend itself to falling for the candidate with best TV ads.

[regnaD kciN]

16. You've got that right about the media...

In caucuses, you not only vote for candidates, but discuss and pass resolutions on issues to the higher levels...resolutions that might make it into the national platform. It's a lot more than just punching a hole beside a name.

Of course, it means that you don't know, for sure, which candidate got the most pledged delegates for some time, which means the media can't get to do their flashy animated tote board graphics as the newsanchor intones "based on our exit polling, we project Joe Blow has won the Washington primary" ten seconds after 8:00 P.M. They really hate not being able to do that...

[Wwagsthedog]

12. Looks like things are starting to go backwards

Most of you probably don't know that JFK was the first president to emerge from the primaries as we know them. It is a real shame that all the political gains we've made since 1960 seem to be unwinding and placing political power back in the hands of a few.

[regnaD kciN]

17. Not necessarily...

In the old days, you didn't have the caucus system either. Generally, party bigwigs would simply appoint themselves or their obedient underlings as delegates, with no popular input at all. The current system here doesn't work that way.

Besides, even if the courts hadn't thrown the "blanket primary" out, I'd be glad we're not using it to allocate delegates. This year, since the GOP nominee isn't in doubt, you'd see tons of Republicans casting their votes for whichever Democrat would be likeliest to lose.

[SOteric]

20. I understand there is a proposal

to make the repeal of the primary effective only for this upcoming year's election, as well as one to make the change permanent.

The Seattle Times article states that:

"Lawmakers approved an initiative to the Legislature in 1989 to create the presidential primary, after widespread criticism over Republican caucuses and the state GOP convention's being taken over by backers of television evangelist Pat Robertson."

http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis...

I realise this observation will meet with very mixed result, -eliminating the primary will not do any favours for even a potentially strong candidate from a third party. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing will depend upon one's perspective in the matter of 3rd parties.