Washington Gov. Gary Locke today vetoed the Louisiana-style "Top Two" primary that passed the legislature last month. The likely result will be a "Montana-style" open primary that lets every voter vote in any party's primary, but that restricts each voter to a single party per primary election. The voter's choice of party would be kept secret. This strikes me as a very reasonable compromise between openness, privacy and party integrity.

The "Top Two" primary, in which only the top two finishers would go on to the general election, regardless of party, would have both destroyed the parties as viable organizations and also reduced voter choices in the general election.

The Seattle Times lobbied pretty hard for the "Top Two" system. (Unsigned editorials Mar. 10 and Mar. 24, Danny Westneat's column Mar. 17 and Erick Devericks' editorial cartoon Mar. 28). Other newspapers also endorsed the Top Two primary: The Olympian, Mar. 17; The Columbian Mar. 13. I can understand why some newspapers might prefer the "Top Two" system. If parties are rendered irrelevant, candidates lose organizations that can help them get elected and voters lose organizations that help recruit, brand and provide information about candidates. In a party-less world, media outlets with their ability to create name recognition and bestow endorsements become that much more powerful.

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, on the other hand, opposed the Top Two primary. I think of the P-I as the "Baghdad Jim McDermott" of newspapers. Far to the left, and more interested in expressing its feelings and ideals than in actually having any influence.