All three candidates in 32nd District face learning curve

Published 10:41 am Thursday, August 7, 2008

An Enterprise editorial last week said that either of Maralyn Chase’s challengers for State representative in the Aug. 19 primary would have a steep learning curve if elected.

That’s also true for Chase herself. Chase has been in the Legislature for seven years but seems to have learned little about being an effective legislator.

Chase is skilled in understanding her district, but she shows little understanding of the Legislature. She introduced more bills this year than all but one other legislator, but most got nowhere because she has not learned how to work with leaders of her party. In fact, she has such little status with Democratic House leaders that when they handed out committee chairmanships and vice chairmanships before the 2007 session, they gave a vice chairmanship to a Republican rather than to Chase.

Contrast Chase’s status in the Legislature with that of the 32nd District’s other representative, Ruth Kagi, who heads an important House committee, is the Legislature’s leader on early childhood education and other children’s issues, and has written other important legislation.

Allan Martin for state treasurer

Republican Allan Martin is a logical candidate for state treasurer. Martin is a longtime deputy to Democratic state Treasurer Mike Murphy, who is retiring.

Murphy, who has endorsed Martin, asked the 2007 Legislature to make the office non-partisan, but the bill died in committee.

Charles Johnson for state Supreme Court

Charles Johnson is a good choice for state Supreme Court. Johnson has been a steady and sensible member of the court.

Johnson faces two challengers in the Aug. 19 primary, meaning that, if no one gets a majority, the top two will face off in November. If someone gets a majority, he will be alone on the November ballot.

Looking at the new ballot

The ballot that came in your mailbox looks different from any ballot you have seen. That’s because of Washington’s new top-two primary.

When the U.S. Supreme Court approved the top-two system, it called claims that the system would confuse voters “mere speculation.” To avoid real confusion, the ballot has an explanation that each candidates’ “party preference” does not indicate that the party endorses or approves of the candidate. That same explanation appears at least three times in the voters’ pamphlet.

Each candidate is listed as either preferring a particular political party or having “no party preference.” That’s because Washington’s political parties had convinced two lower federal courts that the voter-approved top-two system would force the parties to associate with candidates they don’t approve of. With that in mind, state elections officials designed the ballot and the filing system so that candidates would not designate themselves as Republicans or Democrats, but rather to list their party preferences. Hence, some Republicans listed their party preferences as “GOP” rather than Republican and some listed their preference as “No New Taxes Party.”

Evan Smith is Enterprise forum editor. Send comments to him at entopinion@heraldnet.com.