If the primary is secondary . . . what’s the point?

You say you’re thinking about throwing a party to celebrate the 2012 Washington presidential primary? Might be a good idea to wait a little while before you send out those invitations. If Rep. Sherry Appleton’s House Bill 1324 makes it to the governor’s office, Washington would take a pass on the 2012 ritual – and save an estimated $12 million in the process.

But wait; wouldn’t that keep our state from having a say at the national Democratic and Republican presidential nominating conventions? How about all those funny hats and balloons – wouldn’t we miss out on all that? Not really. The last time the state parties were legally bound by the results of our state’s presidential-preference primaries, Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas, Sir Mix-A-Lot was topping the charts with “Baby Got Back,” and Johnny Carson ruled the late-night airwaves. A change in the law in 1995 gave the state parties the option to ignore the primary results and choose their respective delegates at precinct caucuses. They’ve done so in varying degrees ever since.

“If it doesn’t have any relevance,” Appleton asks, “why are we doing it? I’d rather put that $12 million into education, or health care, or services for vulnerable people. Twelve million dollars can go a long way,” she added. “It might seem like a small amount when we’re working on a budget that totals in the billions, but if you put human faces on that $12 million, it becomes a big deal.”

The bill – which Appleton points out would only cancel the 2012 presidential primary, and wouldn’t be a permanent kill – got mixed reactions in a public hearing Wednesday morning in the House State Government & Tribal Affairs Committee. They’ll give the bill a “do pass” or “do not pass” recommendation within a few days.