More

Rogue States Threaten To Destroy Delicate Balance Of 2012 Primary Calendar


First Posted: 03/01/11 04:36 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:35 PM ET

As you no doubt know, the beginning of the presidential primary season begins with the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primaries, an arrangement that has allowed voters in those states to have an early hand in shaping the outcome of the nomination contests. This system is typically beloved by people from Iowa, people from new Hampshire, people who love tradition and people who love freezing nearly to death in the dead of winter while covering a bunch of candidates who will mostly fail in their endeavors.

The iron lock of the two states is pretty much hated by just about everybody else, and, with increasing frequency, other states typically try to crash the early primary party. In 2008, this led to all sorts of comical angst on the Democratic side, as Florida and Michigan defied party leaders to have early primaries. If you enjoyed all of that michegas in 2008, then you should look forward to 2012, which is shaping up along the same lines.

Florida, for example, is at it again, only this time it's the GOP primary that's encroaching on the turf enjoyed by Iowa and New Hampshire. Officials have scheduled the Florida primary for Jan. 31, which would push it ahead of the four states that the RNC allows to have primaries before March 1: New Hampshire, Iowa, Nevada and South Carolina. New Hampshire actually has a state law that mandates that their primary be seven days ahead of any other state's. (Iowa is in the clear here, because they have a caucus.)

Florida's decision means that New Hampshire could push their primary way up the calendar:

Tom Rath, an attorney in Concord, served on a Republican delegate selection committee that established the calendars for the upcoming primary cycle. He said moving New Hampshire's Primary into earlier January conflicts with holiday activities and is less beneficial to voters.

He recalled one year when the New Hampshire Primary was held on Jan. 8.

"The important thing (in 2012) is we get the entire month of January," Rath said. "It's a much better time for our citizens to take a look at these people and they're not doing something that's rushed for the holidays."

Gardner said, "I would prefer that New Hampshire doesn't have to have its primary pushed up to the holidays, but as far as what Florida decides to do, it's up to Florida. And we will do what we have to do here."

Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad is threatening to push their caucuses ahead of schedule as well:

"We will move up," Iowa Governor Terry Branstad, a Republican, told CNN on Saturday at the National Governors Association winter meeting. "We did it last time. We will do it again. We will be first and New Hampshire will be after us. We will work them on whatever we have to do."

South Carolina's not having any of that, either:

South Carolina's outgoing GOP chair says Florida should lose the party's convention if the state doesn't fall in line with the rules and move back its early primary date.

"I would not be averse to pulling the convention if Florida doesn't follow the parameter of the rules," state party chairwoman Karen Floyd, who is not running for re-election, told the Tampa Tribune. "If you can't play by the rules you can't receive the benefit of those rules."

As if this wasn't bad enough, Minnesota is also bucking the carefully-wrought primary plan. Ben Smith has a detailed rundown:

Minnesota law establishes February 7, one day after Iowa, as the default date for that state's caucuses. The date can only be changed with the consent of both political parties. The parties must, according to the statute, agree to change the date "no later than March 1 of each odd-numbered year"

[...]

But the Minnesota Republican Party has refused to budge, arguing that its caucus is merely a non-binding affair held on the same date as a non-binding presidential straw poll.

As Smith points out, that's technically how the Iowa caucuses work, as well, and he suggests that Minnesota's decision could get bothersome if either Iowa isn't "comfortable" with the arrangement, or if Minnesota inspires further defections from the planned primary calendar. Right on time, here's Bob Beatty of the Hutchison News suggesting that Kansas might want to join in all this jumping to the front of the line.

In 2008, when Florida and Michigan moved up their primaries, they were initially told that their elected delegates would get no vote and no seat at the Democratic National Convention. Later in the year, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee relented in part, and agreed to give delegates from those states a half of a vote each at the convention. Eventually, the day before the convention, all of those delegates had full voting rights reinstated. Given all of that, it's not clear what leverage the RNC is going to bring to bear against these intransigent states.

And that's why one day, the Iowa caucuses will probably take place on Halloween, or something.

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to tv@huffingtonpost.com -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
As you no doubt know, the beginning of the presidential primary season begins with the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primaries, an arrangement that has allowed voters in those states to have an ...
As you no doubt know, the beginning of the presidential primary season begins with the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primaries, an arrangement that has allowed voters in those states to have an ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 327
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (10 total)
  1 of 1  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
dizmo4 06:12 PM on 03/01/2011
Lets just move up the 2012 primaries to June 2011. Then move the 2016 primaries up to 2012 and so forth.    


This whole thing is ridiculous.  Primaries should be spaced out between January and August of the election year.  Make candidates go to each state and spend time there and talk about local issues.

Super Tuesday and the like benefits whoever has the most  Read More...
06:24 AM on 03/03/2011
The worst part about Iowa being first is ethanol ...all of the subsides of it and just the plain foolishness of using our food supply to produce fuel that uses more energy to produce a gallon of than that same gallon puts out in energy. With rising food prices as well?
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Sesame2009
Don't Probe Me, Bro!
11:37 PM on 03/02/2011
Primaries shouldn't be a way for a state to make money.  And manipulating the primary calendar shouldn't be allowed. 
 
There should be a lottery.  Each state should pick a number out of a hat.  Those with the lowest number get first dibs on picking which week they hold their primaries first.  That way, if a state wishes to have an early primary, they have an equal chance of being able to hold that early primary. 
 
Personally, I would love for people like Pal.in and Huckabee to have to hoof it to Hawaii and try to appeal to that electorate first! 
08:06 PM on 03/02/2011
My proposed better system:
http://son­-of-metis.­blogspot.c­om/2008/01­/primary-s­chmimary.h­tml
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
whyisthis41
05:54 PM on 03/02/2011
DO YOU REALLY THINK YOUR VOTE OR OPINION MATTERS.!!!
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
LittleOldLadyWho
Lifelong Liberal Democrat
10:12 PM on 03/02/2011
Yes, I do!  And, as many elections that came down to less than 400 - 500 votes, every vote counts!!

If you chose NOT to vote, you have that right.  And, you have no right to complain about the outcome!
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
OSCPJ
Want it? Work 4 it. No 1 has ever drown in sweat.
10:21 PM on 03/02/2011
So was it YOUR vote, or the vote of those 4-500 people?  If you would of stayed home it would of been determined by one vote?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
whyisthis41
02:06 AM on 03/03/2011
LITTLEOLDLADYWHO,
I have voted in every election since I was of appropriate age to do so. NOT VOTING has never been an option.The blatant prostitution of this system has corrupted the American Dream. Empire corporatists KOCH BROTHERS , PENTAGON MILITARISM, dumbing down of the citizenry...bye bye to the value of your vote.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:38 PM on 03/02/2011
I don't know what the answer is but I feel we need to create a new system. Why do two of the smallest states get to hold so much power over the rest of us? I like the regional idea...
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
PatLow
A karate man bruises on the inside
05:14 PM on 03/02/2011
This is becoming a joke. Time to simply have primaries on the same day. This would also eliminate the discrepancies between democratic and republican systems in where republicans are a winner take all vs dems take a percentage which ends up prolonging the primarys.
photo
soyyosisoy
CEO and Janitor.
10:49 PM on 03/02/2011
It would be like having the MLB post season games played at the same time. No fun.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
PatLow
A karate man bruises on the inside
10:44 AM on 03/03/2011
Perhaps they can reduce it down to 4 or 5 events over a two week time frame. Plus you would still have all the run up material and the general election.
Boomerwoman
Momma said there'd be days like this
04:59 PM on 03/02/2011
Solution: regional primaries with each region getting to go first on a rotating basis.
04:35 PM on 03/02/2011
What are the procedural rules for a recall in Wisconsin? I hope the Wisc Dems cite these. If they follow the protocols note for note, step by step it would be a great learning experience for so many people frustrated with their 'elected' officials.
photo
soyyosisoy
CEO and Janitor.
10:51 PM on 03/02/2011
Does that "frustrated" many people include the majority of voters who voted them in?
photo
RedStateHostage
Prevent Truth Decay, Turn Off Faux Noise
04:15 PM on 03/02/2011
Oh what fun. The candidates, assuming some will actually announce, won't know where to go first.
This is going to be the best entertainment since the Roman Coliseum.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
03:05 PM on 03/02/2011
Good. It's time for the primary system to change. Make them all the same day, or randomize the order every election.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JustJoy7
Give your best, expect the best from others.
02:57 PM on 03/02/2011
Too much time and too much money is spent on election cycles in America. We need to stop all that expensive foolishness. Everything about America is getting crazy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cdub1991
Seek first to understand, then to be understood
03:38 PM on 03/02/2011
"Gettying?"
photo
CanisLatrans
Progressive/2nd Amendment Jewish Iraq war vet.
02:35 PM on 03/02/2011
I have a better idea: how about no primaries until 12 months before the actual election day, and then no campaigning until 6 months before the election day?

Spare us from the "pleasure" of getting to start having to face our dismal choices for "leadership" 2+ years in advance.

"Oh, boy! I have the next 2 years to watch the arguments between the Corporate hog, the Corporate pig, the Corporate sow, and the Corporate swine! Yippee!" --Blah.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Shaun Hensley
The American Experiment has failed
12:56 PM on 03/02/2011
"New Hampshire actually has a state law that mandates that their primary be seven days ahead of any other state's. "

That's just ridiculous.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
onionboy
Blessed are the Cheese Makers
04:52 PM on 03/02/2011
I hope some state quickly passes legislation to hold their primary six days from now. New Hampshire will implode.
12:04 PM on 03/02/2011
As the mother of a 10 and 17 year old who have been in rare form lately, I saw "calendar" and "2012" in the same title, and was hoping there was confirmation that the Mayan calendar was proved to be correct, and I'm almost through...lol!
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ianmcc
Those who you let anger you conquer you
11:31 AM on 03/02/2011
New Hampshire's strangle-hold MUST be ENDED. This state needs to have another state pass the SAME law that they must have their primary a week before ANY other state so it can go before the SCOTUS and NH's state law can be nullifed once and for all as federally unconstitutional.