Public funding for private elections

Primary elections are kind of strange creature; they are neither wholly private nor wholly public affairs. The private aspect is that they are elections in which a political party selects its candidates for offices in the general election; the public part is that the elections are conducted by and paid for by government. It is the public funding of the private event that intrigues me.

It makes sense that state governments cover the costs of putting on a general election. In a general election we are choosing members of government and conducting and paying for that election by the government is appropriate. But a political party is not a branch of government so why don't they pay for their own primary? My assumption is that because state election law requires primaries, the state elects to pay for them. Of course you have to remember that those same laws are made by members of those same political parties that would have to foot the bill if the state didn't.

Only a few states had primary elections before the tragicomic Chicago Democratic Convention in 1968. That was when the Democrats picked Hubert Humphrey as their presidential candidate even though Gene McCarthy had won all the primary elections. In fact, Humphrey chose to not run in any primary.

Five out of a possible six types of primary election processes are used in the various American states: closed, semi-closed, open, semi-open, blanket, and non-partisan blanket. In a closed primary only registered party members can vote in their party's primary election, while a semi-closed primary allows "non-aligned" voters to participate. An open primary — that's Montana — is one in which the voter is given a ballot for each party and decides which ballot to vote in the privacy of the polling booth, and in a semi-closed primary voters have to publicly state which party's ballot they want to vote and then are given only that ballot.

And then there is the gone but not forgotten blanket primary where every party's candidates are on the ballot and voters can vote for any candidate for an office without regard to political affiliation.

Around every primary election I get asked why we have to choose only one party's ballot; we vote for the person, not the party, folks say. I get a lot of incredulous looks when I tell them it's illegal. Three states, Alaska, California, and Washington used to hold blanket primaries until 2000 when the United States Supreme Court said they were unconstitutional.

In 1996 California voters passed Initiative 198 which established a blanket primary system. Four California political parties — Democratic, Republican, Libertarian, and Peace and Freedom — sued to have Initiative 198 declared unconstitutional and prevent it from being implemented. They lost in District Court, then appealed it to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and lost there, as well. They then appealed to the U. S. Supreme Court which held that Proposition 198 violated a political party's First Amendment right of Free Association. Conservative and liberal Justices made up the seven-member majority with two liberals — Ginsberg and Stevens, disagreeing. Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the opinion for the majority.

The basis of the Supreme Court's decision was that First Amendment gives citizens the right to associate with whom they wish. It also gives people the right to decide with whom they do NOT want to associate. In essence a political party is nothing more than a group of people with similar points of view getting together to promote that point of view by electing their members to political office. To have to allow people of opposing views a part in their candidate selection process defeats the very purpose for which they are gathered together.

"Representative democracy in any populous unit of governance is unimaginable without the ability of citizens to band together in promoting among the electorate candidates who espouse their political views." Scalia wrote, "… In no area is the political association's right to exclude more important than in the process of selecting its nominee."

There is a type of blanket primary that is still legal, and it is found — where else — in Louisiana, home of interesting politics and politicians. It's called a Non-partisan blanket primary, and the top two vote getters — regardless of party affiliation — face each other in the general election.

In a time when a large part of the American public chooses not to affiliate with any political party, a partisan blanket primary, though illegal, is still an attractive option. But there is a legal way around this dilemma, and that's to follow Nebraska's lead and make some or all of the elective offices non-partisan. There are pros and cons to that, too, but that argument is for another time.

Jim Elliott is a state senator from Trout Creek in his 16th year of legislative service, and is chairman of the Senate Taxation Committee.

Paul has intense drive, sincerity, honesty

I am appalled. In the State of the Union address our President reported reassuring optimism over the economy and reconfirmed a need for ever greater militarism in our current war as well as expanded fighting elsewhere. Members of Congress leaped up and down obediently, and apparently unquestioningly, in compliant support. Our campaigning for the presidency has turned into a popularity contest to determine who is the most charismatic, compassionate, and pleasing in appearance, while attracting the least uncovered scandal. Sorry this is not a popularity or beauty queen contest.

Our country is facing major problems, probably the most critical in the history of our nation. We are verging on losing our form of government, our constitution, our country, which have achieved for us admiration throughout the world for our high standard of living, advanced technology and freedoms. Unfortunately we are now in an apparent state of decline. Daily we see increased crime, drugs, poverty, poorer education, health problems, loss of industries, attacks on our private property and personal freedoms.

None of this is being adequately addressed by the candidates, Democrat or Republican, except for Ron Paul. He has made open statements on all. Meanwhile from other candidates we are repeatedly assured of "hope and change"… you can fill in the blanks. Everyone in the world knows of things that need "changing" and we are all "hoping" for someone to take the top office to provide for our "dreams." These are politically safe promises, offensive to no-one, designed to instill the comfort level to gain votes. Candidates carefully tap-dance around the very critical issues that worry people, that we feel uncomfortable about… not quite fitting or traditional for vote-gaining hype.

Ron Paul has the intense drive, sincerity and honesty to openly state with conviction his position on every issue. First and foremost he would bring present wars and military bases to a close and bring troops home, with no plans for future wars unless for true defense under attack. He knows we must secure our borders and control illegal entry. He would implement only those regulations and controls essential to protecting our productive capacity and the environment in a business-friendly manner to regain a stable economy and restore our freedoms. Of the many problems in need of solving, these are probably the most critical, needing immediate action, but with understanding that it will require time, skill and dedication to achieve turn-around and correction.

As a doctor Ron Paul maintains deep compassion for the welfare of the country and its people. He is ready and qualified with years of experience in public service and in the medical field to take on with urgency the social, economic and diplomatic issues we face.

Clarice Ryan is a resident of Bigfork.

Your help needed to locate Jess Foley

To the editor,

This is an open letter to ask assistance from folks in Columbia Falls. I'm attempting to get in touch with a young man, Jess Foley, who was a friend of our family. Jess' parents, Murphey and Susie Foley, raised and trained Newfoundland search and rescue dogs.

We'd be grateful if someone knows how we might locate Jess. If you have information, please write to: Janice Roberts, Box 522, Malta, MT 59538.

Janice Roberts

Malta