In Shoreline, the local Democratic and Republican committees have called for delaying the selection of a candidate for the vacant position on the City Council.

If the two party organizations are for it, I’m against it.

The two parties have continued to show disregard for the voters.

First, they have opposed having a meaningful presidential primary, in favor of maintaining a caucus system that excludes independent minded voters and discriminates against participation by handicapped voters and against participation by those who may be away on business or vacation.

Second, they have opposed continuation of the blanket primary, a system that has given us such distinguished moderate leaders as former Gov. Dan Evans and the late U.S. Sen. Henry Jackson. Yes, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled a similar system in California unconstitutional, but Washington’s parties didn’t have to fight this state’s system, and they don’t have to fight efforts in the State Senate to adopt a constitutional open primary.

Third, the parties have punished independent-minded office holders like State Sen. Darlene Fairley, D-Lake Forest Park, who was “unendorsed” by the 32nd District Democrats because she opposed the party’s handpicked candidate for a seat in the State House of Representatives.

Fourth, they have fought challengers to the handpicked party candidates for nomination, as the Republicans have done with Reed Davis, who plans to oppose U.S. Rep. George Nethercutt for the nomination to oppose U.S. Sen. Patty Murray next year.

For party organizations to have credibility, they need to show concern for the state’s independent-minded voters. So next year, we need people to run for the positions of precinct committee officer.

USC-Michigan in Rose Bowl: good

At the beginning of the new year, football teams from Louisiana State and Oklahoma will play for the “national championship” of college football, leaving Southern California to play Michigan in the Rose Bowl.

That’s as it should be.

For 80 years the champion of Pacific Coast football played in the Rose Bowl, and for 50 years the Big 10 provided the opponent. A trip to Pasadena was the reward for the champion of the Pacific Coast Conference, the Athletics Association of Western University, the Pac-8 or the Pac-10, often the University of Southern California. And Michigan was often the opponent.

That all ended a few years ago when the Rose Bowl became part of the Bowl Championship Series, meaning that a Pacific Coast or Big 10 team that was ranked 1 or 2 might be sent to whatever was designated the championship Bowl, or, once every four years, when the Rose Bowl was designated as the championship game.

The West Coast teams should stick with tradition, and maintain their ties with the Rose Bowl. If someone wants a national championship game, hold it a week after the bowl games, with the top two teams selected after the bowl games, That would have been fair this year, when the three teams had similar credentials for top honors.

Otherwise, the West Coast teams should stay out of the national championship nonsense, as the Ivy League has stayed out of the Division I-AA playoffs. .

My proposed initiatives

If you’ve read previous columns, you know that I want to maintain an open state primary and that I want to make the Sound Transit Board a democratic entity. Here are two statewide initiatives I want to propose for 2004:

#1:

“In the primary election for all partisan offices, all registered candidates shall appear on a single ballot. Each candidate may list his or her party affiliation or run as an independent. Political parties, through their state, county or district organizations at duly announced conventions and caucuses, may, if they choose, endorse one or more candidates, and those endorsements shall be noted on the ballot and in the voters’ pamphlet.

“Candidates who do not file during the filing period may later file as write-in candidates, meaning that their votes will be counted, and, if they file early enough, have their statements published in the voters’ pamphlets. Write-in candidates may, if they choose, list a party affiliation, and party organizations shall be free to endorse write-in candidates.

“All registered voters may vote for whomever they choose either by choosing from a candidate on the ballot or by writing in a name.

“At the conclusion of the primary, the top two candidates shall be qualified for the general-election ballot, as long as each gets at least 1 percent of the votes cast for that office.

“If no more than one candidate qualifies for the general-election ballot, others may register as write-in candidates and have the same rights as registered write-in candidates for the primary.”

What this initiative would do is continue our tradition of an open primary, force everyone to vote for his or her favorite candidate to try to get that person on the general-election ballot, give us a one-on-one contest in November and allow the party organizations to designate their non-binding choices for each office.

I’ve left the 1 percent threshold for nomination because that is what we now require for non-major-party candidates.. I’ve maintained the registered write-in provision for the primary but eliminated it from the general election to maintain the one-on-one nature of the general election.

#2:

“In the Sound Transit District, members of the board shall be elected by the voters of the District’s five subareas, in proportion to the population of each subarea, that proportion to be determined by the results of the U.S. census every 10 years.

The first election shall be in 2005, with all candidates in each subarea competing on an at-large non-partisan ballot, with the top third elected for four-year terms expiring in 2009, the middle third for two-year terms expiring in 2007 and the lower third for one-year terms expiring in 2006. After one term, all positions shall be up for election every four years. If the number of positions in a subarea is not evenly divisible by three, the largest number shall be in the one-year class and the second largest number in the two-year class.

In addition, the county executives of King, Pierce and Snohomish counties may meet with the Board as non-voting ex-officio members.”

This is designed to make the Board democratic. After the initial election in 2005, one-third of the Board members would be elected in ‘06, ‘10 etc.; one-third in ‘07, ‘11 etc., and one-third in ‘09, ‘13 etc. We would elect no one in ‘08, ‘12 etc. because the ballots are so crowded in those years.

County executives now have too much influence. This would eliminate that. But, they should have the right to speak at meetings.

Just recognition

A tiny note in the sports pages last week listed John Carlos as an inductee into the National Track and Field Hall of Fame.

He was picked because he won an Olympic medal, ran the first sub-20-second 200-meter dash and achieved No. 1 world rankings in both the 100- and 200-meter sprints. His induction also brought back memories of one of the most controversial chapters in Olympic history.

Carlos’ medal came in 1968, when a group of Black American athletes threatened to boycott the Olympics because of racial inequalities at home. The group, centered at San Jose State University, decided not to boycott, but rather to make some kind of symbolic statement on the world stage.

The statement came at the ceremony to award medals for the 200 meters. As the “Star Spangled Banner” played and two American and one Australian flag flew above the stadium, Carlos and gold medalist Tommie Smith looked down and raised their black-gloved fists in the air.

The International Olympic Committee found this rather mild protest offensive and told the U.S. Olympic Committee to send the pair home.

The USOC caved in and sent them home when it could have told the IOC that Americans have the right to salute or not salute the flag as they wish. Instead, the USOC sent the two home, knowing that their only remaining role would be as alternates in case relay runners got hurt, and to walk in the closing ceremony.

The move came back to haunt Americans four years later, when officials sent home the American gold and silver medalists in the 400 meters. after a much milder gesture, leaving the Americans one runner short for the 4×400 relay.

We’d like to know what you think. If you have a comment send it to

The Enterprise

P.O. Box 977

Lynnwood, Wash. 98036

E-mail: entopinion@.com

Fax: 425-774-8622

Evan Smith is the Enterprise Forum editor