The major-party presidential nominations are big news. But in Washington state, the focus has been on not only who we nominate, but how we nominate.

Our system for nominations, both public and private, is under scrutiny. People are questioning the role of the state in relation to the internal functions of the major parties, which are private political associations. And it should be no surprise that the discussion reveals widespread discontent among Washington voters.

This climate of discontent is fertile ground for a nonpartisan election proposal. The presidential primary is only stoking the coals.

Because Democrats will allocate no delegates from the state primary vote, and Republicans only half of theirs, many people are claiming voter disenfranchisement. They’re mad because their primary vote won’t count. What many voters don’t understand is that in nomination races, they’re not electing a candidate to a public office. The major-party candidates are participating in an internal function of two private organizations: the Republican and Democratic parties. It just so happens that the state is funding and administering this function. But any voter who doesn’t like the rules of any organization, including the Democratic or Republican party, need not associate with them.

It’s been reported that one quarter of the primary ballots in our state have been disqualified because voters didn’t check the party oath box on the envelope. Many voters are weary of the oath box and don’t want to pledge allegiance to a private organization. Some don’t want to get on a party’s mailing list. Some see the major political parties as villains and the oath box as subjugation.

Voters can and will disassociate themselves from the major parties. That doesn’t mean they’ll stop attending Democratic potlucks or Republican barbecues (who really goes to those anyway?). Voters will disassociate by zapping party affiliation off the ballot with a nonpartisan blanket primary.

Washington’s 2008 presidential primary was the first of a triptych of events driving consensus toward a nonpartisan system for our state and local elections.

The second event will be a U.S. Supreme Court ruling this spring. It’s widely anticipated the court will uphold all of the lower rulings, and declare I-872 unconstitutional once and for all. This will trigger widespread calls for nonpartisan elections as a solution to our voting malaise.

And finally, this August, Pick-A-Party ballots will arrive at voters’ homes. Exclusive party-section ballots antagonize most Washington voters. These ballots alone pack more power than any political mass mailing. They will be a priceless advertisement for the nonpartisan election movement.

I-26, an initiative proposing nonpartisan top-two ballots for King County elections is already collecting signatures for the November ballot. Opponents will make reasoned arguments about the importance to voters of party labels on down-ballot races. Or that political association is important to our democratic system. Or blah, blah, blah.

I-26 will likely pass only because voters don’t want exclusive Pick-A-Party sections or party oaths on their ballots. It’s that simple! After King County falls nonpartisan, the movement will spread toward state legislature elections themselves.

It’s not that Washington voters want a nonpartisan system, they just don’t want the partisan system we have now.

Pierce County voters cast off the Pick-A-Party primary for a partisan version of Ranked Choice Voting (RCV). This system provides the important informational cue of party affiliation next to each candidate’s name while at the same time offering the wide-open choices voters want.

Political association is a fundamental component of a functioning democracy. Partisan Ranked Choice Voting elections are a lifeline to this notion. With all this attention on how we conduct elections, RCV deserves to be considered a viable alternative.