Monday, October 26, 2020
Oct. 26, 2020

Linkedin Pinterest

Camden: Washington presidential primary has uneven history

By
Published:

Next year’s state presidential primary may be on life support after a meeting last week in which Democrats blocked an effort to move it from late May to sometime in March, when there could be more candidates in the race and more interest among the electorate.

Quite a bit was said at the meeting of the Presidential Primary Selection Date Committee about the virtues and popularity of these elections in Washington. Some of it was even true, although to be an annoying stickler for details, some of it was clearly not, such as the contention by two Republican members of the panel that “the people have spoken and they said they want a presidential primary.”

Not exactly. After lawmakers killed various presidential primary bills for more than a decade, a 1989 initiative to the Legislature gathered enough signatures that they were faced with either passing it themselves or sending it to the ballot. Clearly able to read the results of surveys that showed it was popular, they passed it. Voters never actually weighed in.

From that point on, the presidential primary has had uneven support from the electorate.

The political parties aren’t required to abandon precinct caucuses, which they’ve used for decades, and select delegates with primary results. Washington voters don’t register by party, so there’s no guarantee that Republicans are voting for the GOP nominee or Democrats are picking the Democratic nominee.

Reaction to the first presidential primary in May 1992 was underwhelming at best. Both parties held their caucuses months earlier. The Democrats’ caucus leader in Washington, Paul Tsongas, had dropped out by May and Bill Clinton had the nomination all but sewn up. President George H.W. Bush was running for re-election, so the GOP nomination was not in doubt. The one wild card in the race, Ross Perot, was running as an independent, so he wasn’t on the ballot but got some 53,000 write-ins. Washington voters were accustomed to getting a primary ballot with all candidates from all parties on it, and some balked at having to sign a statement that they wished to participate in a particular party’s primary and getting that party’s candidates. Turnout was paltry, about 10 percent.

Four years later, state officials moved the primary to March 26 to be more relevant. Even so, Bob Dole had the GOP nomination in hand by then and Clinton was running unopposed for re-election.

In 2000, neither party had an incumbent running and each had a long list of early candidates. But by the Feb. 29 primary, Vice President Al Gore was pulling away from other Democrats. Although the party was sticking with precinct caucuses for delegate selection, the events were close together and rival Bill Bradley came to boost his chances in both venues. But Gore won the primary by a landslide and captured most delegates at the caucuses.

Republicans awarded a handful of delegates from the primary, but only from results of ballots cast by voters willing to say they were Republicans.

Primaries canceled

The state canceled its primary in 2004 because Democrats wouldn’t use the results to award delegates and all the Republican delegates were likely to go to Bush. Four years later, both races were wide open in February, when Washington held caucuses on Feb. 9, and a primary 10 days later. That year, voters got a single mail-in ballot with all names of both parties’ candidates. But they had to check a box on the envelope saying they considered themselves a member of the party of the candidate for whom they were voting, or the ballot wouldn’t be counted.

In 2012, with the state still recovering from the recession, Washington dumped its primary, saving an estimated $10 million.

Next year, Republicans plan to hold caucuses on March 5 and Democrats on March 26. Republicans will award half their delegates on primary results, if one is held, but Democrats are under dictates from the national party not just to ignore the primary but to “educate” their voters that it has no bearing on their process.

Loading...