The Grange and the state achieved a victory for voters' rights March 27 when U.S. District Court Judge Franklin D. Burgess of Tacoma upheld Washington's blanket primary that allows voters to choose any candidates of any political party in primary elections.

"The vision of the Grange to preserve the rights of voters has lasted 67 years," said Washington State Grange Master Terry Hunt. "As long as political parties attack the blanket primary, the Grange will defend the people's right to choose their candidates."

Burgess ruled quickly and decisively in favor of the Washington State Grange and the secretary of state, affirming that Washington's blanket primary is constitutional. The Democratic, Republican and Libertarian parties had sought to overturn Washington's primary election system after a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2000 found California's blanket primary unconstitutional.

"The political parties' evidence that there is a burden on their constitutional right of association is, for the most part, incompetent and inadmissible, and at best, it is insubstantial and speculative; the political parties have failed to carry their burden of proof," said Burgess.

State Master Hunt appeared with Secretary of State Sam Reed and State Attorney General Christine Gregoire at the secretary of state's office for a press conference after the March 27 ruling.

Reed and Gregoire applauded the Washington State Grange for pressing the effort to preserve the blanket primary.

"The Grange supported us from the beginning," said Reed. "This is a victory for the people of Washington who overwhelmingly support the blanket primary."

"Maybe some politicians and party leaders were caught off guard by the judge's decision to uphold Washington's blanket primary," said Hunt, "but from the beginning, we were confident that we would win. In 1936, and again in 1980, the Washington Supreme Court upheld the people's choice of blanket primary laws in this state because the political parties could not show any damage to the party system. Now, the Federal District Court is just telling them the same thing."

The Washington State Grange, original author of the blanket primary in 1934, successfully defended the state's primary system last year when political parties attempted to force legislation modifying the primary. The battle continued in court, where the Grange took the lead in presenting evidence to retain the blanket primary.

As the Grange pointed out in the court motion, California's blanket primary differed from Washington's blanket primary because Washington does not require voters to register by party affiliation. Judge Burgess ruled in agreement with the Grange that the political parties failed to prove any injury to their right of association.

The Grange originally proposed a blanket primary to promote the right of voters to choose candidates and the right to vote without divulging party affiliation.

"Part of constitutional protection is the right of each voter to participate in the primary without disclosing his or her party affiliation," said State Grange Attorney Jim Johnson. "If the blanket primary is replaced, party ballots would violate voters' absolute secrecy in elections."

Judge Burgess ruled that the "Secretary of State and the Grange have demonstrated that Washington's blanket primary is a constitutional exercise of the State's power to regulate elections, as they have shown that the political parties have failed to come forth with sufficient evidence to prove the blanket primary's unconstitutionality."

Judge Burgess also noted the Grange's argument that Grange members' "First Amendment rights as a non-partisan association advance their political interests best in this system allowing them to vote for candidates from either party."

Eliminating the blanket primary would likely cause a decrease in voter turnout as well. When California's blanket primary was replaced last year with a closed, party-based primary system, voter turnout percentage for primary elections hit its lowest point in history according to the March 7, 2002, edition of the Sacramento Bee. "If the blanket primary was eliminated in Washington, we would probably see not only a drop in primary election voter numbers, but also a fall in voter turnout for the general election," said Johnson.

Should the political parties wish to appeal the court's decision, they have 30 days to do so and it would probably take a year or two before any decision was rendered. Gregoire, a Democrat, and Reed, a Republican, have asked the parties to back off and accept the judge's decision. Party opposition to Washington's immensely popular blanket primary would only alienate voters, they said, and they point out that the state already enjoys highly competitive campaigns where parties end up with excellent nominees.

But should an appeal be filed, "We're feeling as good as we could possibly feel about our chances on appeal," said James Pharris, a senior assistant attorney general who argued the state's case before Judge Burgess. "If he had asked me to write the opinion, I couldn't have written it any better."

Gov. Gary Locke expressed his pleasure with the court decision. "This is good news," the governor said. "Washingtonians cherish their independence, and [the] ruling allows us to continue voting the way we have for 67 years." Secretary of State Reed agreed and said, "This is a victory for the people of the state of Washington and our populist tradition. The blanket primary has worked in our state for more than 60 years. This ruling sends a clear message that in Washington state the primary belongs to the people."

Media attention to the court decision has been overwhelmingly positive. "Washington voters should applaud the court decision that gives the state's immensely popular blanket primary system an extended lease on life," said an editorial in the Tacoma News Tribune. "U.S. District Court Judge Franklin Burgess of Tacoma made the right call by upholding the state's primary system against a legal challenge mounted by the state Democratic, Republican and Libertarian parties. And for once, the state parties should place the wishes of citizens over their organizational interests and refrain from challenging the ruling on appeal."

Seattle Post-Intelligencer columnist Joel Connelly breathed a sigh of "relief" that "Judge Franklin Burgess emphatically upheld Washington's blanket primary against efforts by the [three] parties to force voters to register or declare a party preference, [thereby] limiting ballot choices. Burgess preserved my range of choices, and spared me the avalanche of junk mail that flows when one's name gets on political mailing lists."