Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

The endless campaign

Regional primaries needed

Published February 11, 2007 at midnight

Text size  

More Editorials

More stories »

It seems like a lifetime ago, but the 1992 Democratic presidential nomination was in doubt until June of that year. Bill Clinton didn't lock up his party's nod until he won the California primary.

Now it looks as if Hillary Clinton (or some other candidate) will secure the 2008 Democratic bid around Groundhog Day. Same with the Republicans. Talk about your perpetual campaign.

Bills are now zipping through a host of legislatures that could let 30 states hold their primaries or caucuses before March 1 of next year; if all pass, as seems likely, 24 states would cast their votes by Feb. 5, including six of the 11 most populous states. That means Republicans (and their ideological allies) will have nine months to beat up on the Democratic nominee, and vice versa.

And under this scenario, Colorado would remain irrelevant. Our caucuses are set for March 18, though there's talk of moving them to Feb. 5 as well.

We've never liked the front-loading of primaries and the warp-speed process of choosing presidential contenders. The current system can lock out candidates who might be effective leaders but lack the extensive personal wealth or long-standing connections that make it possible to simultaneously run a credible campaign in a number of states.

And the situation will only deteriorate as more states rush to make their choices earlier.

An extended, nationwide campaign with a host of candidates who seriously engage ideas and policies is impossible for the parties to stage in the current environment. But what to do?

Political scientist Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia believes that voters will view the compressed 2008 nomination process as "a disaster," which will inspire "a spasm of productive reformation prior to 2012." We can hope. Sabato's "productive" alternative is a series of four regional primaries, held once a month from April to July, with the order of regions chosen randomly in January of the election year.

This would prevent Iowa and New Hampshire from dominating the process each cycle. It would also keep more candidates in the running longer, and give Americans from all over the country a better chance to evaluate them.

Years ago, Colorado College's Bob Loevy suggested letting Iowa and New Hampshire open the voting. That plan would parcel out primaries over two months, starting in May, with 10 states voting every two weeks.

As with Sabato's proposal, Loevy's would force contenders to court a national constituency. We would prefer either to the current system, which tends to anoint the front-runner months before the conventions, long before many voters pay close attention to the candidates or the issues.