Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (13594)	8/21/2007 11:55:04 AM
From: Ann Corrigan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224730

Here's a fine idea-Regional Primaries: Ludicrous leapfrog USA today, Op-ed Aug 21 2007 You can't blame states for wanting early presidential primaries or caucuses. Small states that barely show up on the political radar most of the time get enormous attention, an economic boost and outsized influence. New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation primary has helped make (Jimmy Carter in 1976) and break (Lyndon Johnson in 1968) presidents. But the other states don't think New Hampshire, the 10th least populous state, deserves such disproportionate influence. So a lot of them are in an increasingly ludicrous race to crowd closer to first place. Florida, the fourth most populous state, tired of being an afterthought, moved its primary from March to Jan. 29. That threatened South Carolina's first-in-the-South status, so its Republicans moved to Jan. 19. New Hampshire's law that it go a week before any primary means it could move to Jan. 12 or earlier. And Iowa's requirement that it hold its caucuses at least eight days ahead of the first primary would dictate a Jan. 4 date — or even a move into this December. This game of electoral leapfrog might be in the best interest of individual states, but it's destructive to the national interest. It's likely that the two major-party nominees will have been chosen by next Feb. 6, leaving a general election campaign that drags on for a stupefying nine months. It wasn't always like this. As recently as 1984, the New Hampshire primary was held on Feb. 28. Only four years ago, most states didn't even begin voting or caucusing until March. With the prospect of Iowa caucuses competing with Christmas shopping, it's past time for a new system. The best idea is regional primaries that rotate every four years, so no part of the country always gets to go first. A lottery could let a few small states vote early, to allow for retail campaigning. It's too late to change the demeaning free-for-all of 2008 (or is it 2007-08?), but the major parties could create a new system for 2012 if they're frustrated and embarrassed enough. They should be.