Democrats may extend length of primaries

[MissCatholic]

Democrats studying the 2008 presidential nominating schedule Saturday appeared more interested in lengthening the campaign than replacing the Iowa caucuses as the lead-off nominating event.

"I personally would like to see the process extend over a longer period of time. I know there is support for that idea," said U.S. Rep. David Price of North Carolina, co-chairman of the Democratic National Committee's 2008 calendar commission. "Now, what that would look like is still too early to tell."

The panel of about 40 DNC members, elected officials and campaign activists met to hear proposed schedules for the 2008 nominating season.

Only Michigan Democrats took direct aim at the Iowa caucuses' lead-off role Saturday.

Michigan Sen. Carl Levin, the most vocal critic of the traditional order, agreed with others that so many states held their primaries and caucuses earlier in 2004 that the nominating campaign was effectively over in six weeks.

But Levin said the key to any new schedule is ending a "monopoly" of early primary attention afforded Iowa and New Hampshire that renders other states less relevant. New Hampshire traditionally has hosted the first primary.

"Iowa and New Hampshire are not the only issue. But it's a big issue. It's the 800-pound gorilla," Levin told fellow commissioners. "It's blocking potential discourse to a more equal hearing, consideration and opportunity for people to participate in the process in other states."

The complaints echo those in past years after Democrats have lost the presidential race, as they did in 2004, and some commission members have said privately they do not expect the group to recommend ending Iowa's and New Hampshire's place at the top of the order.

For Iowa, losing the lead-off role would cost it an outsized voice in shaping the presidential field, more than a year of national media attention and many millions of dollars the campaigns put in the state's economy.

Of the three proposals presented Saturday, only Michigan's would strip Iowa and New Hampshire of their coveted distinction.

The plan Levin offered would allow the DNC to choose up to six of the most competitive states, based on the previous election, to hold nominating contests in April of 2008, while pushing all other states to June votes.

Other proposals by the National Association of Secretaries of State and a group of western states would establish regional primaries, but leave Iowa and New Hampshire alone.

Sen. John Kerry won the 2004 caucuses and New Hampshire primary en route to a near-sweep of the remaining nominating contests. But the movement by states to hold their events earlier than in years past gave President Bush ample time to plan his attack on Kerry.

Some critics of the traditional order have said Kerry's victories in Iowa and New Hampshire demonstrated disproportionate influence of the two states.

"I actually agree with what you're saying that voters want to be relevant," commission member Jeanne Shaheen, the former governor of New Hampshire, told Levin.

"I just disagree with your conclusion that Iowa and New Hampshire are the issue here," she added. "I would argue that front-loading is the real issue that has pre-empted their ability to weigh in in other states."

Defenders of the traditional kickoff say Iowa and New Hampshire, as largely rural and less populated than most states, require candidates to spend time, not just money, to win support.

But a key criticism of allowing Iowa and New Hampshire to launch the nominating process has been that both states lack major urban areas and have relatively small racial minority populations.

"You need to see America close up, so if you never have the opportunity to talk to African-Americans, then you run a risk," said Tina Abbott, first vice-chairwoman of the Michigan Democratic Party.

Iowa commission member Jerry Crawford sought to blunt those criticisms by inviting leading black Iowa Democrats Ako Abdul-Samad and state Rep. Wayne Ford of Des Moines to address the commission.

Abdul-Samad, a Des Moines school board member, was a key Kerry backer last year, while Ford has co-organized the Brown-Black Forum, a pre-caucus candidate event that emphasizes minority issues.

"All I know is we are inclusive and are happy to be a part of the process," Ford said.

DNC Chairman Howard Dean won unanimous election in February after Iowa's 11 members endorsed him, based on Dean's assurance he had no agenda to uproot the caucuses as the first contest in 2008. Dean has said publicly that any change must be compelling.

The commission plans to meet in July and October before voting on a recommended 2008 schedule in December. The full DNC is expected to vote on a plan next year.

[Joe Republic]

Do the parties have a choice over when and how to hold the primaries?  I thought that was up to the individual states?

[Mr. Morden]

Do the parties have a choice over when and how to hold the primaries?  I thought that was up to the individual states?

The states can hold their elections whenever they want to, but the parties cannot be forced to use the results of those elections to determine the awarding of delegates.  This was all litigated at some point (in either the '70s or '80s I believe), and basically the courts ruled that the parties were private organizations that could use whatever rules they liked to determine who gets to be a delegate.

AFAIK, both parties currently have rules stipulating that any state using a primary or caucus to determine the awarding of convention delegates must do so within a certain calendar window.  Iowa and New Hampshire have exemptions (due to the historical tradition of those two leading off) that allow them to schedule their caucus and primary earlier.  In recent years, more and more states have been moving up their primaries to the earliest possible day in that calendar window, which results in all the frontloading of the calendar that we've been seeing.

Or something like that.  I'm sure someone on this board knows more about this, and can correct me if I got any details wrong.

[jokerman]

This is exactly what we need to do.  Every state moving up their primary to get more influence is only going to increase the impact of Iowa and New Hampshire.

[True Democrat]

Wow, every Democrat in Michigan just screwed themselves for any Presidential run.

[Erc]

Of primary seasons without an incumbent President, 1972 on:

Only Kerry, Gore, and Carter won Iowa, New Hampshire, and the Nomination.

No non-incumbent Republican has managed the feat (the closest is Ford in '76).

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Wow, every Democrat in Michigan just screwed themselves for any Presidential run.

I'm certain Gov. Granholm will be most distraught over what it did to her chances.

[MissCatholic]

It would be interesting to see what chances Granholm had had she not be born in Canada.