Michigan Joins the Race for a ‘Me First’ Primary

Source: NY Times

The primary election calendar is a lot like the weather: Everyone gripes about Iowa and New Hampshire going first, but no one does anything about it.

This year they are trying mightily.

States have been falling all over themselves to get some of the attention lavished on little Iowa and New Hampshire. Bigger states have long felt that these two largely rural, largely white states are not representative of the rest of the country. The intense scrambling has left the primary timetable up in the air.

The latest state to try to muscle its way up front is Michigan, where the State Senate could meet as early as today to start the process of moving its voting, probably to Jan. 15. Florida has already hop-scotched ahead and may be penalized for doing so. South Carolina Republicans leap-frogged ahead of Florida.

<snip>

“Michigan has been bellyaching for years, more vociferously than any other state, about Iowa and New Hampshire going first,” Mr. Ballenger said. “They’re saying, ‘We’ve had it, we’re going Jan. 15, we’re going to trump everyone,’ and that’s what they’re determined to do.”



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/22/us/politics/22calendar.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Allowing a few non-representative states to decide the nominee, aside from being undemocratic, gives way too much power to party insiders.

The coronation of Senator Clinton would not seem so inevitable if all of us had a say.

is that both Iowa and NH have laws on their state books that require them to be first in the nation. So by Michigan trying to move their primary to Jan 15th, would mean that we would start to vote in primaries in December of this year.

Hey, maybe Illinois will actually matter this time!

Just show how illegitimate their demand to always be first is. They can hold their primaries on Christmas day if they like, but there is no reason why Michigan and Florida shouldn't get to help decide the nominee.

Michigan (and whoever else) says, "Nope. Not this year" and reschedules to be first (or at least equal) again. Then the IA and NH state laws kick in and they reschedule to be first again. So then, after a few shots of tequila, Michigan says...

If you're wondering when your state primary is, never mind. By the time all the rescheduling and one-upsmanship is over you already had yours three days ago.

Iowa and NH have some serious entitlement issues doen't they?

What then?

And is that federal law, or state law, because if it's state law, well... who the fuck does ANY one state think it is to dictate to the other 49 "I go first!!"?

Sheesh.

And neither Michigan or Florida is passing a law that says that they have to be first. There is no conflict between the changes Florida and Michigan are making, and I think they should support each other on this.

Only Ia and NH have bizarre "me first!" laws, AFAIK.

Their petty whining is annoying. I am sick of those two lily-white states picking our nominee. The calendar needs to be set by the parties, on a rotating basis.

IMHO it is long past time for there to be a single national primary (not caucus) day in all states.

spends the most money...um, er... time in those states. Having early contests in small states forces the candidates to spend time with the voters not just money on T.V. ads and flyers. A national primary will only ensure tarmac to tarmac campaigns and ad wars. Whoever has the most money wins.

States don't elect the delegates, the voters in the primary do. Each state gets the same number of delgates as before. In my voting history, I got to select delegates for exactly one candidate each time: Carter (1980), Mondale (1984), Dukakis (1988), Clinton (1992 and 1996), Gore (2000), and Kerry (2004). All the other candidates had dropped out (or couldn't possibly get enough delegates to matter) before the show hit the state I was living in at the time, so the show didn't hit my state. I'm sure having candidates spend "time with the voters" is a great concept, but most people never get that opportunity anyway.

I think the debate approach provides a lot of opportunity to reach a lot of the voters early and often, without requiring a lot of money from the candidates. The format needs work to get a more even distribution of time to all the candidates and not the media darlings. Also, you could limit money issues by having public or party financed primary campaigns and put all the candidates on an even playing field.

however there is still the logistical problem of running for office in a large state. Look at the size of Iowa/New Hampshire and then look at the size of California or Texas. How does a candidate campaign in a large state w/out just flying from one point to the other and holding a rally at the airports? In a national primary we won't see question - answer scenarios we will only see stump speeches and rallies.

NH laws make the playing field much more level for underfunded or lesser-known candidates.

All it takes to get on the ballot is $1000 and membership in a recognized party. The state has a spending cap for federally-funded candidates that is substantially lower than larger states--you can run a campaign for $500,000 in NH. (Of course, those who don't use the federal funds can and do ignore that cap.) Even the ballots themselves are required to rotate the order of candidates' names to give everyone a shot at top billing. The state is compact enough that candidates can create one central headquarters and get anywhere within the state in an hour or so by car. Politics in NH is grassroots politics.

I was in NH last week. I met 2 candidates and went to several events, and I saw not one single ad. You can't just buy NH, you have to get face-time.

Is if we had a virtual tie (between whomever) going into the very last primary of the year. Then the state pulling up the poll position would end up being the most important one. And the one that would have had the longest to review the candidates at that.

:)

Plus it would have the added advantage of keeping the candidates in the news longer. Let the Republican nominee fade into the background for months while the Democrats dominate the airwaves.

This is getting crazy.