The U.S. Supreme Court's decision to uphold the open primary election system in Washington will make candidates responsive to a broader constituent group earlier, Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed said today.

Whereas candidates in a partisan primary must play to either Republicans or Democrats, those running in an open primary will have to find middle ground well before the general election, he said.

"They'll realize, 'I'm going to have to campaign to a cross-section of the electorate -- even in the primary,'" he said.

Reed said he will implement the state's top-two primary ballot in time for the Aug. 19 primary. He doesn't think it will be difficult because he expects the ballot to be similar to the old open-primary ballots used as recently as 2002, when voters could vote for any candidate for each office regardless of party identification or affiliation.

By a 7-2 vote, the Supreme Court says the state may use a primary system that allows the top two vote-getters to advance to the general election, even if they are from the same party.

Reed, who was in Yakima on Tuesday morning to meet with the Yakima Herald-Republic editorial board, was surprised when he heard of the court's decision earlier in the day.

"I thought at least three of them -- just from listening to their questions -- were against us," he said of the justices on the court.

The Supreme Court's decision, which restores the voters' ability to cross party lines when casting their vote, is in line with what most Washington residents want, Reed said.

The top-two plan was created after state voters approved a law in 2004 allowing them to pick their favorite candidate for each office. The top two vote-getters would advance to the November general election, even if they are from the same party.

Washington never held a primary under the new system because of legal challenges.

Though it's likely that most general elections still will pit a Democrat against a Republican, there will be times when both candidates come from the same party, he said.

"Aren't those the two candidates that people want to vote for in the general anyway?" Reed asked.

In Washington, D.C., writing for the majority, Justice Clarence Thomas said that overturning Washington's plan would have been an "extraordinary and precipitous nullification of the will of the people."

In dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia said Washington's system would cause a political party to be associated with candidates who may not represent its views. Scalia was joined by Justice Anthony Kennedy.

Lawyers for the political parties said David Duke has identified himself as a Republican, despite GOP repudiation of his racial views, while perennial presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche has called himself a Democrat, despite wide disagreement with Democratic leaders.

Under Washington's system, all candidates for a particular office may list their political party preference after their names.

The major parties challenged the law in federal court, asserting a First Amendment right to select their own nominees without outside interference.

A federal judge and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco struck down the election plan.

Washington state Attorney General Rob McKenna argued there was no evidence that the parties would be harmed, since they can publicize through advertising and other means which candidates they support.

Today's decision is the second of two this year on the rights of political parties. In New York, the justices said the state's method of electing trial judges, which gives party bosses effective control of the process, does not violate the Constitution.

Information from Herald-Republic staff reporter Pat Muir and the Associated Press was used in this report.