The Importance of Primaries

Primary elections allow voters to judge which of their political party’s candidates is best qualified to run for office in general elections. The system works well--when the political parties let it.

The problem is that the major parties, Republicans and Democrats, do everything possible to discourage contested primaries. They put tremendous pressure on candidates who, perish the thought, have the audacity to disregard the wishes of the party hierarchy and challenge an incumbent or other party member who, with the party’s blessing, has filed where there is no incumbent standard-bearer.

Republicans in Orange County were upset in 1982 when Judge David Sills, who was then the mayor of Irvine, dared to file against incumbent Assemblyman Nolan Frizzelle for the GOP nomination in the 69th District. Republican officials are upset again, this time because Nathan Rosenberg is challenging Rep. Robert E. Badham (R-Newport Beach) in the 40th Congressional District. Before filing, Rosenberg, who has resigned as president of the Young Republicans, was viewed as a bright, political activist and loyal party worker. No more. Not since he rejected the party’s urgings that he withdraw from the race.

To many political officials, Republican and Democratic, the goal is expediency and the “practical” politics of avoiding the expense of a contested primary (in which issues and qualifications are discussed). That takes precedence over letting voters pick the party’s best candidate.

The Democrats also have contested primaries this year, the most notable between Assemblyman Richard Robinson and Judge David O. Carter in the 38th Congressional District; and in the fighting 40th, where a write-in campaign is being mounted by Bruce W. Sumner, chairman of the Orange County Democratic Party, against Art Hoffman, who, as the lone Democratic candidate to file against Badham, would have automatically received a seat on the county central committee. Party officials want to head that off because Hoffman is a follower of ultraconservative Lyndon LaRouche.

The Times normally doesn’t endorse candidates in primary elections and we have no intention of doing so now. We leave it to the partisan voters to decide which candidate they want to represent them.

But we do feel strongly that anyone who feels qualified for public office and wants to serve should have the opportunity to seek the party’s nomination. That’s how it is supposed to be. The system and the parties are strong enough to withstand contested primaries. And voters are wise enough to reject unqualified candidates. What can hurt the system is shifting the decision from the voters to party bosses who protect incumbents and try to control primaries by pressuring potential candidates out of running. That may be good “practical” politics, but it’s bad public policy, no matter which party practices it.