On March 18 of this year, the United States Supreme Court decided the question of whether or not Washington could use the “top two” primary election system as we, the people, had twice declared was our preference.

We did that once by a bill voted on and approved by our Legislature and once by initiative filed and approved by majority vote of we, the people.

But, at least two people didn’t like the idea of letting we, the people, have our way. One was former liberal governor Gary Locke and the other an ultra-liberal U.S. District Court judge who hangs out in San Francisco. So Locke vetoed the legislative bill and the judge ruled our initiative unconstitutional. But, judges who hang out in San Francisco are wont to rule everything unconstitutional.

Happily, the Supreme Court is a little more down-to-earth these days and even two of their four liberal members sided with the majority in a 7-2 vote to let we mere mortals who live in Washington make some decisions for ourselves. Yup! The court said we could use the top-two primary election system.

To understand why this is such a big deal, you sort of have to subscribe to the notion that the political parties and the average voter see the primary election serving different purposes. The parties contend that primaries are the method by which they select their preferred candidate. The people see them as the way they narrow the field down to two candidates.

Many of these people think of themselves as being a Republican or a Democrat, but in fact, very few are actually party members. The political parties have just historically relied on the people’s perceptions that they, themselves, are one or the other.

The “top two” will really result in some big changes! First, it will fuel the fire which the political parties have built. They want the ability to decide who can use their names ... Democrat or Republican ... when running for office, and they’re supposedly suing to get that right.

Second, it will end all the “tampering” during primary elections by discouraging people from intentionally voting for a weaker candidate in the hope of eliminating a strong candidate of the detested “other party” during the primary.

Third, it weakens the influence of the parties and puts emphasis on the candidates themselves rather than their party affiliations.

From now on, voters in primaries will simply have to select their favorite candidate and it will have to be the person they really, really want to ultimately get the office they’re running for. I think this new process will really open things up for independent candidates in local or maybe even state elections to have realistic chances of success — and that’s good!

Frankly, I’m a bit tired of hearing how the political parties think they’ve been deprived of the ability to “select their candidates.” Well, that’s just not true. You haven’t been deprived of a damn thing! Just go hold your conventions and select a candidate.

The First Amendment gives you the right to freely assemble, so go assemble. Just remember that nowhere in the Constitution are the terms, “political party, Republican, Democrat, or primary” even mentioned.

Nope. Party bigwigs want to get their pet candidates on the ballot but they want you and I to do it for them. That gives them a foot in the door to hound you for money.

Personally, I’d rather dump the primaries altogether and just have one big winner-take-all election. Sure would be a lot less painful.

Columnist Terry Christiansen, a former Anacortes City Council member, welcomes comments and suggestions. Contact him at