Today’s Longview Daily News blows the call on election reform.

The LDN editorialists called moving the state’s primary back to JUNE, “the single most important change proposed in the wake of the contested governor's race that prompted these election reforms.”

That is, of course, utter nonsense.

The irregularities with the General Election had very little to do with the mid-September primary. The idea that moving the Primary back to June would have somehow made any material difference in the outcome is, well, bizarre in the extreme.

The problems with the general election primarily revolved around fraudulent registration, no identification requirement, illegal alien and legal alien non-US citizens voting, convicted felons voting, hundreds of “homeless” people voting, failure to follow laws and regulations concerning the handling of ballots… and on and on…

The mid-September primary IS a problem… but it’s a problem solved by moving the primary back a few weeks…. Not months as the LDN suggests.

Moving the primary back would require incumbents to campaign WHILE THEY’RE IN LEGISLATIVE SESSION. How would such an arcane requirement benefit the people of the state of Washington? Or does it matter that incumbents should be restricted from having equal time to campaign?

Incumbents are prohibited from raising funds from 30 days before until 30 days after the legislative session. Does the LDN advocate eliminating those financial restraints? Somewhat… but the restrictions they advocate would only apply to incumbents: “We understand the concerns legislative incumbents have about moving the primary all the way back to June. They would be put at an election disadvantage by the prohibition on campaign fund-raising for 30 days after the session ends. But that concern could be addressed by adopting Reed's recommendation to allow in-district, grass roots fund-raisers during and immediately following the legislative session.”

It’s totally bizarre that the LDN has concluded that only the only disadvantage is one of funding. Never mind the massive increase in travel between Olympia and districts around the state during the week to engage in public appearances and candidate forums.

Of course, we could solve the problem the way they did in Oregon… Just have one legislative session every other year. That leaves the second year entirely available for campaigning without interfering with the business of the Legislature, something the LDN position would guarantee. It only would require a state constitutional amendment… but then, so would a June primary.

This editorial would have, perhaps, made a bit more sense had the writer actually had a clue about what makes up a campaign. And believe me, there’s a lot more to it than money.



Longview Daily News

State legislators must embrace June primary
Mar 09, 2005 - 10:07:36 am PST

Secretary of State Sam Reed recently predicted that Washington voters will see a significantly different election system by the 2006 primary, and legislative activity in Olympia would appear to support that view. A large number of election reform bills have moved out of the Senate over the past five days.

But the jury's still out on just how much change Washington legislators are willing to embrace. We've yet to witness any enthusiasm for the most significant of the many recommended election reforms --- moving the primary date from mid-September back to June.

The Senate has considered pushing the primary back by just three or four weeks. At this writing, senators were still struggling to reach a consensus, with some arguing that the primary should be moved back no more than two weeks.

More...