Fixing the Primary Mess: The Fair Primary

There are times when life imitates satire. One happened recently when George Bush commented on his education policy, “Childrens do learn.” Way back in April during the first Democratic presidential debate, Joe Biden, a man who is not known for his brevity, answered a question with a one word answer. Students of satire wait with baited breath for those moments when Hillary Clinton is warm and funny at the same moment, the powers that be in baseball show something that represents a backbone, and Paris Hilton turns down an opportunity to be photographed.

But I have left out one of the most absurd processes known to humanity: the Iowa Caucuses.

Whether you are a romantic or a cynic, I think you have to agree that the President of the United States holds a position of considerable influence and authority.

Given it’s importance, shouldn’t the first formal step in the election process be a sane one?

Of course it should.

Is it?

Of course not. Exhibit A: the Iowa Caucuses.

Is Iowa a microcosm of America? Let’s see, Iowa is 91% white.

That doesn’t represent America.

Does it have the same urban/rural mix as the US?

No.

It its median income in the economic middle of the US?

No.

Religiously, does it represent America?

No.

In national elections, does it have a history of voting for the candidate who is elected President?

No.

There’s more bad news.

Is the process that voters go through during the Iowa caucuses similar to the one they will visit later?

No way.

During the Iowa Caucuses less than seven per cent of the Iowa voting public meet in rooms and yak for a couple hours. They make a convoluted journey through a minefield of complex rules. The sum of these idiocies leads one candidate being declared a winner.

However, there is one tremendous benefit the Iowa primary gives us. Iowa is a relatively small state. Candidates can meet and talk with Iowans in small arenas. This is a good thing.

Let’s remember a purpose of a primary is to select the candidate from a party who is most likely to win the presidential election. Therefore, it is an excellent idea to hold the first primary in a state that is a microcosm of the United States.

The benefits of the first electoral exercise are obvious. The winner gets a tremendous boost. If the candidate gets this boost from a state that is a microcosm of the US, that victory will be good for the candidate, the candidate’s party, and the country.

Missouri Gold

Right now, Missouri is the state that is most like the US. It has the same rural/urban mix as the nation. It has the same percentage of Christians, African-Americans, and union workers as the nation. It ranks twenty-seventh in median income—for those of you who are mathematically challenged, that’s one step away from being exactly in the middle. Like the US, it has two blue coasts (the areas around St. Louis and Kansas City) with a large area of red in between.

Missouri is not one of the behemoth states. Relative to some of the electoral monsters out there, it’s downright small. It is roughly ten per cent larger than Iowa.

There’s more good news. Given the various ways that Missouri mimics the US, it should not surprise that Missourians have voted for the president longer than any other state. They’ve done so since 1960. If you allow one exception, in 1956 when it voted for Stevenson, the string goes back to 1904!

I am not advocating that the first primary be held in Missouri for the next century. I am advocating that the first primary be held in the state that comes closest to serving as a microcosm for the US.

Also, the first electoral exercise should mimic the larger exercise many of us go through the first Tuesday in November. It shouldn’t be an event where a tiny percentage of the state’s population participates. It should be a statewide election.

Call it the Little America Primary.

Regarding That Regional Primary Thing

Rightly, there is a good deal of support for rotating regional primaries. There are various plans. All divide the country into regions and rotate the regions. This would be a very good thing. Every region would get a turn at going first. Most years most regions would have a say in the nominating process. Rotating regional primaries would eradicate the primary traffic jam we will experience in 2008. However, most rotating regional primary proposals keep the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary in tact.

The New Hampshire Primary is another bad tradition of American politics. New Hampshire is 97 per cent white. It ranks first in median income. It has no history of voting with the country for the candidate who becomes president. New Hampshire doesn’t mimic the demographics of the nation.

But like Iowa, New Hampshire is a small state. This allows candidates to meet and listen and talk with citizens.

Small States

I suggest we keep the benefits of the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary. Elevate the importance of the small states. It’s easy.

Require each region to vote in a particular month. Have Region One votes in February, Region Two in March, and so forth. Hold the first primary in a region in one of the small states in the region.

Every region has one humongous state. You know what I’m talking about, states like California, New York, and Texas. If the primaries held there occur on the same dates of other primaries in the region, the large states will steal most of the thunder. So let the biggest state in terms in a region—at least in terms of electoral wallop—have a stand alone primary.

That leaves two weekends for the rest of the region. Bundle the states together so that it is easier for the candidates to campaign and to buy television time. This will mean each region will have a southern section and a northern section.

To be fair, rotation within a region will be necessary. The small states in the region can rotate to determine which goes first. During one election cycle the southern section would go first, in the next, the northern.

Let’s summarize. The ides of a rotating regional primary is a very good one. But kick things off with a primary in a state that most represents America. Then in February start a series of regional primaries. Dedicate the first primary in each region to a small state. Give the Big Kahuna in each region a stand-alone. And let’s help the candidates a little and bundle the rest of the region into two sub sections. And within each region, rotate.

Call it the Fair Primary.

Some other Good Ideas

Every contest is a primary—no straw votes, no caucuses, no beauty contests.
All primaries have proportional representation. If a candidate wins half the vote, that candidate is awarded half the delegates.

So that people who work have more of an opportunity to vote, hold the elections on Friday and Saturday.

Polls close at the same time on Saturday throughout the region. Because all the states in a particular primary will be in one or two time zones, this should not be difficult.

But polls may open early. And on Friday they may remain open late. For example, areas with a large Jewish population may elect to have polls open early on Friday to allow plenty of time for people to vote before the Sabbath begins. Some areas may elect to remain open late on Friday—so that people have plenty of time to vote after work.

Make the first primary an open primary. Voters may vote once for candidate from any party. This will make the sampling even more like a cross section of America.

All these ideas will make the process more fair. And every election season it will invite new groups of people into the process. This should stimulate interest in a process central to the lives of all of us.

This would be a good thing.

Natterings

Nattering nabobs of negativity will raise all sorts of flags. The first will revolve around tradition.

My response. . . If it’s a bad tradition, change it.

Another will response will be, How will the current system be changed?

The parties, realizing what a mess things are this year should address the problem.

Call me old-fashioned, mid-Victorian, and all too provincial, but it seems to me that if something is broken and you are going to fix it, it is far better to fix the thing completely—rather than do a patch job.The current primary system is silly and chaotic. The rush to be heard early in the process is a just a symptom of a larger problem within the process we have now.

The Fair Primary is a vast improvement to the way we do things now—and it is darn close to fair.