N.H. Primary in Question
WASHINGTON, Oct. 31 – Come 2012, New Hampshire may not have exclusive bragging rights to the first primary in the United States.
As both parties wrestle with whether and how to reform their primary processes, the primacy of the Granite State’s primary is open to debate. Party leaders from other states are angling to move ahead of New Hampshire, but what the final calendar will look like remains unclear.
“No deals have been made and no decisions have been finalized,” Rep. David Price (N.C.- 4 th ), who co-chairs the Democratic National Committee’s Commission on Presidential Nomination Timing and Scheduling told a forum on the presidential nominating process sponsored by American University’s Center for the Study of the American Electorate and the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies. The commission is scheduled to meet on December 1 st to consider revising the primary calendar.
Added David Norcross, chair of the Republican National Committee’s Committee on the Rules: “This is a topic that is going to take a lot of discussion if we’re actually going to make any changes. There appears to be no appetite in the [Republican] party to change.”
During the forum on Monday, top officials of the Republican and Democratic parties met to discuss the problems with the timing of the current presidential primary process, as well as possible solutions.
A major problem with the current nominating system, according to Curtis Gans, director of the Center for the Study of the American Electorate, is that it causes “front-loading,” or the grouping of most primaries into one month because states are trying to gain or maintain political relevance by moving into the start of the process. This means candidates must raise a minimum of $25 million before the first election, rather than having the opportunity to use early successes to gain funding that can be used to campaign in later primaries.
The current system also causes the primaries to be grouped into “mega-contests” immediately following the New Hampshire primary and Iowa caucuses, which requires candidates to spend more money in the two states, Gans said, also noting that it creates earlier filing deadlines that make it difficult for late-entering candidates.
Gans argued that the system needs to be revised by spreading primaries out over a long time-span to ensure decisions are made rationally, by reducing the number of mega-primaries held on the same day and by changing filing deadlines so late-entering candidates can run on the ballot, rather than as write-ins.
“The front-loading has some perils and it would be nice to spread that out,” Price agreed, adding he believes an effective solution to many of these problems might be moving the entire election process a few weeks, or even a month, later into the year.
“That’s not feasible in this round,” said Price, referring to the 2008 elections. “It will be hard to pull off, but it might very well be worth our bipartisan efforts.”
Norcross, agreed that moving the election process later into the year might help solve some of these common problems, but added that as with the Democrats, no change could take place until 2012 because it would have to be voted on at the 2008 Republican National Convention.
Thomas Sansonetti, former General Counsel for the Republican National Committee, and Don Fowler, former chair of the Democratic National Committee, also participated in the forum.
