BusinessReport.com

If you voted on Oct. 20, consider that one more thing that makes Louisiana different might soon never be the same. The days of the open primary could be numbered.

The winds of change are blowing from the two Washingtons, the state and the U.S. Supreme Court, which heard arguments last week on a challenge to Washington’s “top two” primary, which is similar to Louisiana’s open primary.

In Washington, all candidates are listed on the same ballot with each stating a “party preference,” whether they are members or not. The two leading vote-getters meet in a runoff, even if they prefer the same party.

The plan, approved by voters in 2004, was challenged by the state’s political parties, who argued that it violates their First Amendment right of free association and that it burdens parties “with messengers and messages the party does not want.”

For a Louisiana example of a messenger a party did not want, there was David Duke, who made the 1991 runoff for governor as a Republican, when it’s doubtful if GOP voters in a party primary would have chosen the former Ku Klux Klan leader to represent them.

“I definitely think there is an impact for Louisiana,” says LSU law professor John Baker, who represented plaintiffs in a 1999 challenge to the state’s open primary system, which was brought on different grounds. “If Washington loses, you can expect a suit here.”

By the line of questioning from the justices, prospects for the status quo in Washington, and thus perhaps Louisiana, don’t look good. Several justices seemed to agree that the political parties are damaged by a system that doesn’t give them some control over nominating the candidates to represent them in the general election.

The other side of the argument is that political parties, which are not mentioned in the constitution, have no more rights than individual voters, who should have broad ballot access to choose from all candidates for public office.

Whether or not the Washington system is struck down, or Louisiana’s is challenged again in court, the open primary could be threatened at the Legislature.

In 2006, in order to resolve conflicts with federal law over scheduling congressional elections, the Legislature voted to return to party primaries for federal races only, while retaining the open primary for state and local elections.

So, for U.S. House and Senate next year, there will be a Democratic and a Republican first primary on Sept. 6. But the open primary for local elections (district attorney, judge, school board) won’t be held until Oct. 4, along with the second primaries, if needed, for the federal offices. The general election for all offices is Nov. 4.

Doubtlessly, the hybrid system will confuse some voters about which elections are when. In the federal primaries, the computerized voting machines will be adjusted so Democrats and Republicans will see only their congressional candidates. But, for local elections on the same ballot, candidates of all parties, plus independents, will be listed.

Contributing to the confusion, the Republican Party has decided to close its primary to party members only, while Democrats say they will welcome independents to vote in theirs.

This is bound to lead to clamoring in the Legislature for a common voting system and, if there is also a legal challenge on the horizon, the open primary would be easier to sacrifice.

In the 2004 U.S. Senate race, Democrats, divided by multiple candidates then as now, might have fared better had they been able to use a party primary to unite behind a single candidate to go against David Vitter.

Far from gloating, Republicans have seen the same thing happen to them in past elections. When the two parties recognize their common ground, there no longer may be a place in Louisiana politics for the way we vote now.