Primary season overblown, unfair

According to a Gallup poll conducted on January 26, 1976, Jimmy Carter had a name… According to a Gallup poll conducted on January 26, 1976, Jimmy Carter had a name recognition level of 4 percent at the time. Only one in 25 people had heard his name before. So how did a man who was virtually unknown by America go on to become the most powerful man in the world?

In 1976 Jimmy Carter won the Iowa Democratic Iowa caucus with 29 percent of the vote. He then went on to win the New Hampshire primary and ultimately the presidency, becoming the first Democrat to win the popular vote since 1964. By winning these early primary states, Carter was able to make national headlines and become a household name. These wins propelled him to much larger popularity throughout the country.

Historically, Iowa and New Hampshire have been the first primaries of the presidential election cycle. These states let candidates know who is hot and who is not. Candidates can then either use their momentum from their wins to try and gain further support or regroup and try a different strategy. By winning the early primaries, candidates could show that they are, in fact, capable of winning the general election. Once a candidate is perceived as a true contender, people’s wallets open up and the money flows in. This might have been the way things used to be, but not anymore. The days of early primary success propelling a candidate into the presidency are gone.

Today, Iowa and New Hampshire still make up the first round of primaries with their dates set at January 14 and January 22, respectively, but the second round is only a week later. And as of this week, 22 states have moved their primary elections or are in the process of moving their primary elections to February 5. This means that, potentially, 60 percent of America will have voted in the primary election by the first week in February and the primary season could end only three weeks after it started! This might be the closest thing America will see to a national primary.

While it might be good for career politicians, this alarming trend of moving primary elections earlier and earlier is bad for the people of America. By making the primary so early, there are two equally unwanted and possibly detrimental consequences.

The first is the need for candidates to raise large sums of money very quickly. In the past, candidates could raise money at a steady pace as they moved from state primary to state primary. Today, however, with the majority of primaries occurring within weeks of each other, candidates must raise all they money they can as soon as they can. Because it is so hard to raise money if no one knows your name, this set-up eliminates any chance that a dark horse or lesser-known person could successfully run for president.

All the candidates with any chance of winning will be career politicians who have the advisers and money machines already in place to raise cash quickly and efficiently. Candidates with great ideas such as Representative Duncan Hunter, R-Ca., and lesser known candidates like Tom Vilsack will be out of luck. America will be forced to choose between Bush II and Kerry clones.

Career politicians who tow party lines, who have sold out to special interest groups and bring nothing but a polarized voting record, will become the norm. Candidates who bring innovation, inspiration and fresh ideas to the table will be gone.

The second problem with pushing all of our primaries earlier has to do with the duration of the election cycle. Because so much money is needed so quickly, campaigning will start earlier and earlier. Like the 2008 presidential election, campaigning will start immediately following the midterm elections and will continue until November of 2008. That is two years of presidential campaigning! Don’t Hillary and John McCain have something better to do than campaign for two years? Like be senators?

By making the campaign so long, the candidates will be forced to do substandard work at their “real” jobs. Also the American people will grow bored with all the hollow campaign rhetoric. Maybe the global warming problem could be solved if we stopped all the candidates from blowing hot air for two years straight.

One possible solution to this growing problem is the Delaware Plan. Essentially, the Delaware Plan breaks all the states up by size. The 12 smallest states would all have their primaries first. The 13 next largest would go next, followed by the next 13 largest and finally the 12 largest. All of these groups’ voting would be separated by a month. This method allows for lesser-known candidates to make a name for themselves and allows larger states to retain their power. The RNC almost adopted this method in 2000 but it was eventually shot down.

America does not need earlier primary elections. It needs candidates who are willing to make the tough decisions and the tough compromises required to keep this country moving in the right direction.

Who do you have winning Iowa? E-mail Joe at jjm43@pitt.edu.