Tuesday, August 14, 2007

Everybody wants to rule the world: It's how I feel about the news that some states are thinking of holding Presidential primary elections in February 2008, or January 2008 -- or even December 2007. Now I know New Hampshire and Iowa always go first -- in fact, it's state law that they go first, ahead of any other state. (The only reason they're not fighting each other is because NH holds an election while IA holds a caucus. Yet another reason why words matter.) But recently, South Carolina moved their primary date to be ahead of all the other southern states. Florida decided that just wouldn't do, so they moved their primary ahead of SC. Meanwhile, many states have moved their primaries to a date now known as "Tsunami Tuesday", replacing the old "Super Tuesday" (which was a later date).

In a show of, well, whatever, Bill-the-Honeybear and I agree that, on this one, it's time for the federal government to step in. After all, Congress legislated years ago that election day is the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. As far as federal elections go, Congress can make binding election law. And federal law trumps state law, generally.

What we propose is that Congress pass a law setting the date for national primary elections for federal offices -- the President, Senators, and Representatives. Allow a loophole for NH and IA to hold theirs a week or so earlier, as a nod to tradition.

Me, I think it would be great to force candidates to campaign nationally in preparation for one big primary election. Don't you think it would reduce the pandering to states/regions that is such a huge part of primary electioneering today? Don't you think it's better to have the possibility of there being two or three candidates with equal amounts of support going into the conventions? And wouldn't it be more fun to watch some good old-fashioned horse-trading -- excuse me, compromise -- during the conventions? On the theatrical side, it would be much more exciting -- and generate lots more media attention -- than the coronations we've been subject to for the last 20-odd years.

No comments:

Post a Comment