2004 Washington Initiative 872

Last updated
Initiative 872
Flag of Washington.svg
Washington Blanket Primary Initiative
Results
Choice
Votes %
Check-71-128-204-brightblue.svgYes1,632,22559.85%
Light brown x.svgNo1,095,19040.15%
Total votes2,727,415100.00%

2004 Washington Initiative 872 results map by county.svg
Results by county:
Source: Washington Secretary of State [1]

Initiative 872 was a 2004 ballot initiative that replaced the open primary being used in Washington state with a top-two nonpartisan blanket primary. It was challenged in court up to the US Supreme Court, which upheld the top-two primary in Washington State Grange v. Washington State Republican Party. [2]

Contents

Background

The blanket primary in Washington State was started by an Initiative to the Legislature filed in 1934 and passed in 1935. The political parties in Washington tried numerous times to have an open or closed primary system implemented, and it even filed a lawsuit that was decided by the Washington State Supreme Court in 1936. The state was represented in that lawsuit by Warren Magnuson.

The political parties in Washington State filed another lawsuit against it in 2000 when the blanket primary in California was overturned by California Democratic Party v. Jones and won the case.

The Washington State Legislature passed a new primary system in 2004, which would have created a new top-two primary system, with an open primary as a backup, giving the Governor the option to choose. Secretary of State Sam Reed advocated for the top-two, but on April 1, 2004, the Governor used the line-item veto to activate the open primary instead. [3]

2004 campaign

Initiative 872 was filed on January 8, 2004, by Terry Hunt from the Washington Grange. The language of the ballot measure summary was as follows:

This measure proposes a new system for conducting primaries for partisan offices. This proposal continues current practice of permitting voters to vote for any candidate for any office in primary and general elections, without limitation based on party. The two "top" candidates with the most votes in the primary advance to the general election. Candidates continue to designate their party. It becomes effective only if the court decision invalidating the traditional blanket primary becomes final.

The political parties in Washington opposed I-872 because they felt it would create an opportunity for someone not directly associated with the party to claim the party name on the ballot.

The measure passed with 1,632,225 yes votes and 1,095,190 no votes in 2004. [4]

More lawsuits

On July 15, 2005, the initiative 872 was declared unconstitutional by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

On March 18, 2008, the US Supreme Court reversed the decision and upheld 872. [5]

Top two primary implementation

The decision to uphold 872 changed the implementation of the 2008 primary election, which was held on August 19.

2008 election

In 2008, two State Senate races and five House of Representatives elections had either two Democrats or two Republicans get through the primary election, appearing together on the general election ballot.

The results of a study from Gonzaga University comparing the results in Washington state between the 2004 (closed) and 2008 (top two) primaries, indicate that the top two primary overall reduced the likelihood of running against a same party candidate and it reduced the likelihood that a strong incumbent would face a challenger from his or her own party.

Related Research Articles

Ballot access are rules and procedures regulating the right to candidacy, the conditions under which a candidate, political party, or ballot measure is entitled to appear on voters' ballots in elections in the United States. The jurisprudence of the right to candidacy and right to create a political party are less clear than voting rights in the United States. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has established in multiple cases that the federal constitution does not recognize a fundamental right to candidacy, and that state governments have a legitimate government interest in blocking "frivolous or fraudulent candidacies". As election processes are decentralized by Article I, Section 4, of the United States Constitution, ballot access laws are established and enforced by the states. As a result, ballot access processes may vary from one state to another. State access requirements for candidates generally pertain to personal qualities of a candidate, such as: minimum age, residency, and citizenship. Additionally, many states require prospective candidates to collect a specified number of qualified voters' signatures on petitions of support and mandate the payment of filing fees before granting access; ballot measures are similarly regulated. Each state also regulates how political parties qualify for automatic ballot access, and how those minor parties that do not can. Fundamental to democracy, topics related to ballot access are the subject of considerable debate in the United States.

References

  1. "November 6, 2018 General Election Results, Initiative Measure No. 1631 concerns pollution". Secretary of State. State of Washington. 27 November 2018. Retrieved 20 February 2019.
  2. "Washington State Grange v. Washington State Republican Party (06-713)". LII / Legal Information Institute. 2007-09-16. Retrieved 2018-03-28.
  3. Washington State Governor Archives
  4. Ballotpedia
  5. Supreme Court Decision (PDF)