|
Voters in other states will effectively be allowed to dictate the presidential nominees Illinoisans must decide between unless our state's leaders move to change our primary date. As things stand now, our primary in March of 2004 will likely be irrelevant.
Consider the history of presidential politics over the last decade or so. The reason why Illinois could be left in the cold on March 16 of next year is termed "frontloading," when more states move their primaries closer to the first of the new year.
Illinois was once early in that calendar. At the third Tuesday in March, we are now very late. The frontloading trend started in the 1970s with a series of party-reform rules changes and accelerated dramatically in 1996 and 2000. It will get much worse in 2004 and Illinois is not prepared for this change.
The last time an Illinois presidential primary helped in any meaningful way to select either party's presidential candidate was 1992. That was the year when Bill Clinton won Illinois and Michigan on the same day.
By winning those two large industrial Midwestern states, Clinton, who was already leading thanks to his win in the South two weeks earlier, proved that his appeal was not just regional and that he could play on a national stage in a big, diverse state like Illinois.
Since then, though, the nomination for both parties has been effectively settled before the voters of Illinois have had their say. This is a real loss for both the state and for the nation, for a large, delegate-rich, Midwestern industrial state like Illinois to be excluded from any effective voice in choosing the presidential nominees.
Most people know that Iowa and New Hampshire usually go first and gain massive publicity for their contests. They often help launch some candidates toward the White House and others toward obscurity, but why should such small, rural states have such an inordinate influence on presidential nominations?
Their importance has been dimmed at least slightly recently by the tendency of other states to try to crowd them out by moving closer to the start date which is defined in national party rules by the New Hampshire primary and the Iowa caucus.
While the trend toward frontloading has been in place for several elections, it accelerated in 2000. In three earlier election cycles (1988-1992-1996) there had been a big date when many states, especially in the South, held primaries. That large group of states had so many convention delegates, it was called "Super Tuesday" and it had a major influence on selecting the nominees for both parties.
Then in 2000 several states moved even earlier in the calendar, i.e. to Tuesday, March 7 when several of the big states, including New York and California scheduled primaries.
Up until that point John McCain on the Republican side and Bill Bradley on the Democratic side had made a contest of it. Then on what some called "Titanic Tuesday," March 7, 2000, President George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore won the majority of the delegates up for grabs that day.
On March 9, both challengers, McCain and Bradley, dropped out and the race for the nomination in both parties effectively ended. This was the earliest both nominations had ever been settled. By the time the primary calendar turned to Illinois on March 21, no one noticed or cared what Illinois did.
In 2004 this trend toward an early decision will probably accelerate even more. There is no real contest on the Republican side since President Bush will be re-nominated without an effective challenge; however, that will not be the case for 2008, so the Republicans should also have reason to be concerned about frontloading.
On the Democratic side there are currently nine declared candidates for the presidential nomination. Those candidates will be winnowed down very quickly after New Hampshire and Iowa, and both contests come earlier than ever in 2004, Iowa on Jan. 19 and New Hampshire on Jan. 27.
Then on Feb. 3 eight states will hold primaries or caucuses and 10 more will have their nominations contests in February.
March 2 will be "Super Tuesday" in 2004, with 13 states holding primaries or caucuses, and the contests on that date will almost certainly settle the issue.
Illinois, again, is scheduled for two weeks later on March 16.
What is to be done? Illinois's party and political leaders must recognize these changes and make a legitimate effort to accommodate them. Illinois must move to one of the earlier dates in the primary calendar. If we need to separate the presidential primaries from the other nominations, so be it.
Alternatively, we could switch to a caucus-state convention plan to select our delegates to the national conventions and to indicate our presidential preferences and move that contest to the front of the calendar leaving the state nominations on the third Tuesday in March.
Illinois voters in both parties deserve a chance to have their voices heard in this, the most important collective decision we make as a nation.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
