WP: Panel Offers "Incremental" Changes to '08 Democratic Calendar

The Fix
by Chris Cillizza
Posted at 01:55 PM ET, 12/10/2005
Panel Offers "Incremental" Changes to '08 Democratic Calendar


The Democratic Party's Commission on Presidential Nomination Timing and Scheduling convened this morning in Washington, D.C., to issue their final recommendations on changing the 2008 presidential primary calendar and, in the process, managed to narrowly dodge a last-minute attempt to abolish the first-to-vote status of Iowa and New Hampshire.

The panel, composed of politicians, political science professors and political operatives, spent the morning debating and amending their recommendations, which would simultaneously reaffirm the first-in-the-nation privileges of the Iowa caucuses while adding one or two caucuses before the New Hampshire primary, which, technically would also preserve that state's first-in-the-nation primary status. The panel also proposed adding an additional one or two primaries after the New Hampshire vote but before any other states would allowed to schedule contests.

"We wanted to change the status quo," explained commission co-chairman David Price, a congressman from North Carolina. "We want a sequence of singular early contests that will expose the candidates to a broad diversity of the electorate." Nevertheless, Price conceded that the recommendations amounted to an "incremental change" in the Democratic primary process.

A proposal by Democratic National Committee at-large member Maria Echaveste to eliminate the first-in-line status of Iowa and New Hampshire threatened the commission's overall proposal and prompted a lively debate that provided a rare moment of on-the-fly politicking by the panel members.

Minority members of the commission, led by Echaveste and Donna Brazile, joined with southern (Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln) and midwestern (Michigan Sen. Carl Levin and Debbie Dingell) members to back the proposal. The opposition was led by Democratic consultant Steve Murphy and former Iowa Democratic Party chairman Jerry Crawford, who said such a radical change proposed with little advance notice would invalidate the delicate balance put forth by the commission. They said the proposal would produce unintended consequences, such as discouraging candidates from campaigning in any small states. The Echaveste measure failed on an 18-9 vote though not before several minutes of genuine uncertainty among the commissioners....


http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/thefix/

WASHINGTON, Dec. 10 — Toying with tradition, powerful Democrats recommended Saturday that New Hampshire lose its treasured status as part of a presidential one-two punch with Iowa and push its historic primary behind one or two states with more diverse populations.

The recommendation would add one or two caucuses after Iowa's but before New Hampshire's leadoff primary.

The proposal, which would need to be approved by the Democratic National Committee in April, would also add primaries in one or two states after New Hampshire but before the calendar opens up on Feb. 5.

''I hope this is the beginning of the end of Iowa and New Hampshire's dominant role,'' said Michigan Sen. Carl Levin, who forced the creation of the primary commission in the last presidential cycle.

The new states — which have not been named — would need to be ethnically diverse and from different areas of the country, like the South or Southwest.

http://famulus.msnbc.com/famulusgen/ap12-10-094027.asp?t=apnew&vts=121020051506

It is a poor tradition, if you even
call it that.

Direct election of Democratic presidential candidates via primaries started then too.
Instead of smoke filled rooms we got a rigged primary system that emphasizes small conservative states early on.

Is that the National Democratic Committee give the District of Columbia a more prominent role in the primary process, and move up our primary.

I think it is the least they can do, to show they solidarity with District of Colubmia residents.

We pay federal taxes just like everyone else, and yet, we have no representation in the Congress.

I'd like to see our primaries evened out a little bit. Say, like a 12 week primary season with 3-4 primaries every other week, and the others used to fill in the other weeks. We could have each region represented during just about each primary day. Northeast/Yankee states, Southern states, Pacific Coast/Western states, Great Lakes region, Plains States etc.
I think it would be better for our party, and our country.

At least most states do. Wouldn't this double costs for the states to hold two primaries? And in CA we have ballot initiatives so which day would they be on? Sems like the two parties would need to agree to change the process. I like having smaller states first because the big ones require so much money. Putting CA up front would really front load this to the well funded candidates (read DLC).

NH-Iowa has hurt our party. It's the wrong demographics for the true feelings of the national democratic voters. Is this a DLC influenced commission??