The first primary of the year has always been held in Iowa. Iowa is a tiny little state that gets a LOT of attention every four years. I have always wondered why both Republicans and Democrats let Iowa have so much power in presidential politics. You may recall that on January 3rd Iowa announced that Mitt Romney had won the Iowa Caucus. Today we learn that votes from eight precincts weren’t counted and as a result Rick Santorum actually won the Iowa caucuses.
The New Hampshire primary has already passed (Romney won) and South Carolina’s primary is tomorrow – and Iowa is just now figuring out who won? This is nuts. I think it is time for the GOP and DNC to step back and rethink the whole order of primaries. It never made sense to give Iowa so much power, but now that we ALSO realize that they are incompetent I think it is time let another state be first.
There are a number of primary reform ideas. Which one do you like best (anything but Iowa I say):
Graduated Random Presidential Primary System (American Plan)
One reform concept is the graduated random presidential primary system, variations of which have been referred to as the American Plan or the California Plan. This plan starts with small primaries, and gradually moves up to larger ones, in 10 steps, with states chosen at random. The idea is that fewer initial primaries, typically in smaller states, would allow grassroots campaigns to score early successes and pick up steam. However, since states are chosen at random, travel costs may still be significant.
Delaware Plan
A commission empaneled by the Republican National Committee recommended the Delaware Plan in 2000. This plan had states grouped by size into four groups, with the smallest primaries first, then the next-smallest, and so on. Populous states objected to the plan, however, because it would have always scheduled their primaries at the end of the season. Other criticisms included the wide geographic range of the states, necessitating high travel costs. The Delaware Plan was put to vote at Republican National Convention of 2000 and rejected.
Rotating Regional Primary System
The National Association of Secretaries of State has endorsed a Rotating Regional Primary System, with the country split into four regions: the West, the Midwest, the South, and the Northeast.[20] Unlike the Delaware Plan and the American Plan, the Rotating Regional Primary System would lower campaigning costs by restricting groups of primaries to single, contiguous regions. Criticisms of the regional plan include the higher entry costs than the other plans (since 1/4 of the country would vote in the first regional), and the political bias of certain regions (the South or the Northeast) unduly influencing the selection of a nominee.
Interregional Primary Plan
In the Interregional Primary Plan the country is divided into geographical regions. On each primary date from March to June, one state from each of six regions votes. Each election date would contain a wide variety of perspectives. The order of the states in each region is set by a lottery. In a 24-year cycle, every state would have a chance to be among the first primary states. The primary criticism of this plan is that travel costs would be quite high: in each round, candidates would essentially have to cover the entire country in order to effectively campaign. Contrary to most reform plans, this would reduce the ability of lesser-funded candidates to build up from small contests to large ones.[21]
National Primary
Many have proposed a National Primary, a single day on which all state primaries and caucuses would be held.
