[Politics]

Iowa and New Hampshire, Privileged No More?

The DNC is considering serious changes to the primary schedule--a move WAY overdue. The race for President is effectively decided within the first two weeks of the primary season, and Iowa and New Hampshire, states with populations of 2.9 and 1.2 million (1.4% of the total), have a huge influence. Those states are among the whitest (94% and 96%) and neither have a major city. They are politically similar moderate swing states (Iowa for Gore in 2000, but Bush in '04, New Hampshire the reverse).

Last year, to try to deal with this imbalance, New Hampshire was followed up by "mini Tuesday,"a seven-pack of states that again privilege conservtism: South Carolina, Missouri , North Dakota, Arizona, New Mexico, Delaware, and Oklahoma. Of those states, only one went Kerry--which further means that the DNC, perhaps toadying up to the DLC, is favoring swing voters in Democratic primaries. The point isn't that liberals should be preferenced--that might well lead to defeat in November--but neither should voters least in tune with the Democratic message. And how long will we continue to allow that?

I don't fully understand what the Dems have planned--they're trying to minimize the influence of Iowa and NH, but they've vowed to let them remain first in the lineup. The DNC is apparently moving up other states earlier in the process that would create "greater diversity"--but does this mean more Southern and intermountain (ie red) states? Or will they have the courage to plop a California or Michigan primary early? They also want to encourage other states to keep their primaries spread out--though this is apparently in response to the difficulty Kerry had in maintaining his long period from de facto candidacy to election, not to benefit states like mine (Oregon), where the decision has long been made by the primaries.

Still, small changes. It could be a good step.