I want to see the primary stranglehold held by Iowa and New Hampshire ended, and will cheer the day that happens (and it will).
This isn't great, but it's a start in that direction:
The DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee voted 23-3 to push New Hampshire to third place in the 2008 Presidential nominating lineup. The vote recommended that the full DNC authorize an additional caucus between Iowa's leadoff caucus and the New Hampshire primary and an additional primary after New Hampshire's contest but before Feb. 5, 2008.
Of course New Hampshire is having conniptions.
Secretary of State William Gardner promised yesterday he will not allow the traditional key role of New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation Presidential primary to be diminished by a proposed Democratic National Committee rule change [...]
State law allows Gardner to jump the date of the primary ahead of any "similar election" scheduled less than seven days after the primary.
Gardner also interprets that law as a broader legislative mandate for him to protect the primary from any attempt to diminish its traditional key impact on national Presidential politics.
An additional caucus, besides Iowa's, ahead of the primary may trigger the law and force an earlier date, regardless of party rules that say state Democrats may lose some of their convention delegates.
Gardner has said often in the past that he will move up the date if he deems it necessary, and he did not back away from that position yesterday.
Iowa and New Hampshire are not representative of the nation. Not in the least. Their exhalted roles will not last for eternity.
This is a tiny change, a caucus before New Hampshire which would still retain the "first primary" designation. That New Hampshire is freaking out so much will only harm them long-term. Let them move up their primary. The DNC should retaliate by stripping that primary of its delegate-assigning ability.
My favorite is when insiders blame "insiders" for trying to break up their nice little racket.
Gov. John Lynch said the rules committee "made some progress" by limiting the additional early states to two, instead of three or four.
But he said, "This fight isn't over," and he promised to "support fully any decision (Gardner) makes to protect New Hampshire's primary, including moving up the date."
Lynch also took aim at the DNC and its chairman, 2004 Presidential candidate and former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean.
"Unfortunately, a small group of party insiders seems more intent on undermining a Presidential nominating tradition that has worked well for 50 years," Lynch said. "Even more unfortunate is that (Dean), who never would have had the opportunity to be considered a serious Presidential contender without the New Hampshire primary, is supporting their efforts."
There are 48 states that think Iowa and New Hampshire have an unfair advantage in choosing our presidential nominees. Iowa and New Hampshire's days are numbered.
Comments are closed on this story.