This letter to the editor appeared in the Olympian on September 11, 2006.
The Olympian's Aug. 29 editorial regarding the election primary system accurately reflects the frustrations of many moderate voters who don't really have a party that accurately represents them.
As an alternative, let's look at a system whereby the state funds only open primaries, and the political parties fund any closed primaries or caucuses.
The parties could then select the option of an open primary or a closed one, preserving their rights as set forth in the court decision to choose their candidates as they see fit.
Such a method would provide independent voters a clear idea of which party or parties truly wish to represent them.
Bobby Johnson, Olympia
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I wrote a letter to the editor to the St. Petersburg Times several weeks ago regarding closed primaries. I'm a registered independent, and it angers me that I have no say in who advances to general elections.
This is what I sent in:
Since 2002, 22 percent of Florida voters are registered as neither Democrat or Republican. Also, since 2002, 45 percent of new registrations in Florida have been for none of the major parties.
This raises the question: Why is Florida still a closed primary state? Florida desperately needs a referendum on this, as I suspect the hundreds of thousands of voters who don't belong to a major party would love the chance to be able to vote in primaries.
(http://www.sptimes.com/2006/09/07/Opinion/Obnoxious_campaigning.shtml)
I am not sure if you share my views on closed primaries, but I found your entry here rather interesting! I hope to hear back from you.
Ian
Post a Comment