Posted by
Bert Chapman on Monday, December 17, 2007 5:31:47 PM
With the imminent arrival of the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire presidential primaries so soon after the new year, there has been even more emphasis on the pivotal role these two states play in the presidential election process. For as long as I can remember, both of these states have assumed its their divine birthright to be the first to anoint the Democratic and Republican presidential front-runners, if not determine the presidential nominees for both of these parties. I have nothing personally against Iowa and New Hampshire. I've enjoyed the times I've traveled in these states and appreciate their unique histories and scenery. But enough is enough and it's time for Congress to intervene and give some other states the opportunity to cast the first votes in future presidential election campaigns.
One way this could be done would be dividing the U.S. up into regions such as the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, South, Midwest, Mountain West, and West Coast/Pacific and give primary or caucus voters in individual states within those regions the opportunity to cast their ballots first in the early stages of the nominating process e.g. January/February. Under this system, which could begin with the 2012 nominating season, sample states for each region which could go first might include Maine, Pennsylvania, Alabama, Indiana, Utah, and Hawaii. In subsequent presidential election years, you could designate other individual states from those regions.
Census Bureau regional geographic designations could be used to assign states to particular regions. After the January/February time frame for each year states, could have the freedom to choose when they want to have their presidential primaries in March and later. This would give more states and their primary voters the legally mandated opportunity to choose their parties presidential nominees, it would require presidential aspirants to visit states besides Iowa and New Hampshire during the year leading up to these primaries and become conversant in issues of interest to people in those states, and it would provide enormous economic benefits to those states. Most importantly it would give voters in states besides Iowa and New Hampshire to feel more directly engaged in the presidential nominating process at its outset and increase participation in this nominating process. It's time to end Iowa and New Hampshire's presumption of presidential electoral pretentiousness and let other states and their people's have a crack at being the first to vote for the next President.