The May 24 letter from local Democratic Party official Bill Phillips fails to address what I see as the single largest flaw in the position taken by the two major political parties with regard to the manner in which primary elections are conducted in Washington. Although I personally tend to identify most commonly with the political party of Mr. Phillips’ choice, I part company with the party leadership when it comes to their apparent unwillingness to accept the voters’ clear mandate in passing the “top two” initiative last year.
I have no quibble with the political parties’ right to a membership-based, exclusionary process for the selection of their candidates. I do have a problem with their apparent insistence that all taxpayers of the state foot the bill. Mr. Phillips notes that this year the political parties are holding “their own nominating conventions at their own expense.” This is as it should be. At their own expense.
I have yet to hear the leadership of any political party in this state offer to reimburse the taxpayers for the substantial expense of conducting primary elections. If the political parties want to enjoy their right to closed, exclusionary processes for selecting their candidates, they must accept the corollary obligation of paying for the procedure.
Mr. Phillips takes the Grange to task for its continued efforts to protect the taxpayers’ rights to control the non-exclusionary primary selection process for which they pay. The Republican Party has filed suit challenging the primary election procedure overwhelmingly adopted by the state’s electorate. Published reports suggest that the Democratic Party plans to join them in that effort. My question to Mr. Phillips and the other party leaders in this state is a simple one: What would your position be if the Grange filed suit demanding that your tax dollars pay for their membership-based elections?
Jonathan C. Hatch
Mukilteo
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
