The primary election calendar, along with election reform in general, has received a lot of attention lately from reform-minded Democrats, especially those at Daily Kos and other websites. Now Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell is looking into (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; via Daily Kos) the possibility of making his state's Presidential primary come earlier in the cycle. Excerpt:
"Gov. Ed Rendell thinks a populous state like Pennsylvania should be more of a player when it comes to picking the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates every four years.
"So he's assembling a 13-member elections task force to study whether to move the 2008 Pennsylvania primary election up to late January or early February -- much sooner than the traditional primary in late April or mid-May."
The way we choose our candidates for President really makes little sense. Neither Iowa nor New Hampshire has much analogous relation to the nation as a whole, yet they're basically entrusted with deciding national candidates. There's no easy solution, but one thing is clear: Iowa and New Hampshire's "first in the nation" status must be taken away.
Two of the most popular plans for overhauling the primary season seem to be:
- The Regional Rotating Primary Plan (proposed by the National Assocation of Secretaries of State), which would have four regional groups of states vote in four different months, with the order of the regions rotating every four years.
- The California Plan which would group random states together according to number of congressional districts into ten two-week intervals, the group with the least number of districts would vote first and the group with the most would vote last.
Either plan seems vastly superior to the current arrangement.