Party registration will clean up political process

e-mail this story discuss this issue in our forums Guest column • Lewis R. Vaughn: Party registration will clean up political process (06/22/05) • Lewis R. Vaughn : Party registration will clean up political process (06/22/05) • Marc H. Wilson: Don't obsess about trying to understand death (06/21/05) • Judy Gilstrap: Proposed county budget: less costs, more service (06/20/05) • Judith S. Prince: Women still have a long way to go in South Carolina (06/20/05) More details State Rep. Lewis R. Vaughn of Greer is a Repub- lican who represents District 18 in the state House of Representatives. He is a retired businessman, has served in the House since 1989 and can be reached at HOM@scstatehouse.net.

Should this legislation be enacted, if anyone registers as a Democrat, it will be more than are now registered as Democrats, because party affiliation is not currently allowed under state law.

Voters could also continue to vote "Republican nationally and Democratic locally" if that was their wish. The proposed legislation in no way prohibits voters from casting their ballot any way they want to in general elections. But they should have no right to interfere in primary nominations. The legislation allows anyone to change their party affiliation right up to the last day they can register to vote in a primary. Other flexibilities are built into the legislation as well.

What is the definition of a "political party?" It is defined as a "group united for a common purpose." The only purpose for their existence is to "select their candidates" and to help them defeat opposing party candidates in general elections. Some parties do that by convention while others choose the primary nominating method. However they choose to select their candidates, opposing parties do not have the right to participate in their opponents' selection process. More and more of that is occurring these days and it needs to be stopped.

At last count, 28 states have registration by party with another seven considering it. South Carolina should also get on board and require registration by party.

For too long we've had scrambled party affiliations, where candidates seeking the nomination of a political party of their choosing have not been able to ID their voter base. Intrusions by those of opposite persuasion have resulted in contradictory party nominees and/or wide open voting has allowed the political party to be "used" — making a mockery of the system. The candidate selection process is the sole province of the certified political parties in South Carolina and should never be a victim of innocent or organized mischief. To make my point, Sec. 7-13-190(B) of the S.C. Code allows parties to nominate by "political party convention."

Nominating primaries are not elections. They are financed in part by candidate filing fees paid to the party with the signing of the required "party" oath, then remitted to the State Election Commission, which assists parties in the conduct of their nominating primary. Intrusions or "outside influence" in determining nominees of any party is, I believe, unethical.

If our "open primaries" are encouraged or allowed to continue, we'll destroy our major parties, (that serve a vital purpose of banding together those with similar political beliefs). They will have no reason to exist and all elections will become nothing more than popularity contests (like we had in grammar school). Candidates are elected in the ensuing general elections, open to all registered voters, to split their vote —"vote for the person," of any party to their hearts' content.

A lot of research on registration by party was conducted in preparation for drafting this legislation. It was revealed that in a "U.S. Supreme Court case in California, (Democratic party vs. Jones 2000), they struck down a law that allowed nonparty members as voters in their primaries and protected a political party's right to conduct its own nominating primaries (obviously respecting registration legalities)." The Constitution does not require a state to hold a primary, let alone fund a party's nominating process.

Justice Scalia's opinion, "The prospect of having a party's nominee determined by adherents of an opposing party (or unaffiliated), is far from remote — indeed, it is a clear and present danger. There is simply no substitute for a party's selecting its own candidates." Our open primaries defy this ruling, but remedy is best handled with passage of my proposed legislation, not by any intervention by the courts.

It's time we joined the majority of the states and began registration by party. Elections will be far less costly for both candidates and the state, and will be much more easily and correctly conducted.

I understand why some minority party officials are opposed to registration by party. They obviously don't want their membership numbers (or lack thereof) revealed. Some rural county major party officials will also be opposed because they want to be involved in either or both major parties, whenever it is advantageous for them to do so. Again, I think that it is unethical.

It should be the goal of all political leaders of all political parties to clean up and restore integrity to the political process.