State may cancel 2008 presidential primary election

[flamingyouth]

OLYMPIA -- State lawmakers may cancel Washington's 2008 presidential primary, an election that some say is expensive and meaningless since the state's parties rely heavily on caucuses in deciding whom to support as presidential nominees.

The state's presidential primary was created in 1989 through an initiative to the Legislature. State Democrats have ignored it; state Republicans have used its results in varying degrees in allocating delegates who support a particular candidate.

Rep. Sam Hunt, D-Olympia and main sponsor of the bill to cancel the primary in 2008, said he's not opposed to the idea of the primary, but doesn't see its merits in its current form -- especially since there is a $9.7 million price tag attached to it.

"Do we want a primary that is in effect a beauty contest, or do we want a primary that has impact?" he asked.

Several people spoke against the measure at a public hearing Thursday before the House Appropriations Committee.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/307761_primary16.html

[TechBear_Seattle]

1. Just like they did in 2004

Meanwhile, independent and third party candidates for President must still hold a nominating convention, at their own expense, and without being able to collect funds to pay for it separate from the general election.

Why do we even bother any more with the pretense of democracy?

[flamingyouth]

2. Because apparently democracy is too expensive.

:sarcasm:

[eridani]

3. What's the problem with "at their own expense"?

Dem caucusus are going to cost a whole buttload of money, all of which we have to come up with ourselves. How is that different?

[TechBear_Seattle]

4. Look to state election campaign laws

Major party candidates may collect up to the maximum contribution per person for each election. Even if the primary vote is cancelled, the election technically still occurs. This means that contributors to the major parties may make two maximum contributions to the candidate: one for the primary election (whether or not there is a vote) and one for the general election.

Minor party and independent candidates do not participate in a primary; therefore, contributors are allowed to make only one maximim contribution to the candidate, for the general election.

If a major party choses to hold caucuses to select their presidential candidate rather than hold to the results of the primary, that is their choice. That choice does not, in any way, alter their right to raise money for the pointless primary. Minor party and independent campaigns have no choice at all, as you should know quite well.

[eridani]

5. If the primary gets abolished, they no longer get to raise money.

Problem solved.

[TechBear_Seattle]

6. The state laws do not work that way

There are two sets of regulations: holding the vote, and regulations by the Public Disclosure Commission. In 2004, the cancellation of the presidential primary vote did NOT change the major parties' authorization to collect separate money for the presidential primary election. Check it out for yourself.

Unless the Legislature explicitly orders the PDC to make such a change, the very same thing will happen if they cancel the primary in 2008.