Joshua Spivak: NY should move up its primary
[Joshua Spivak, a lawyer, is a public relations executive.]
LEGISLATORS in Albany are discussing the possibility of moving New York’s 2008 presidential primary up a month to Feb. 5, joining states like California, Georgia and New Jersey in their individual attempts to create a new Super Tuesday on the heels of the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary.
Although some are criticizing the move as a transparent effort to help New York’s favorite son, Rudolph Giuliani, and favorite daughter, Hillary Rodham Clinton, win their nominations, moving New York’s primary is a great idea for the state and the country. And Long Islanders, who represent the critical suburban swing voters that decide elections, should be particularly supportive of the move.
The current primary system is a disaster for many states, especially those that have the most voters. And New York is a great example of how this disaster plays out. Though New York was once a goliath of presidential politics with either a presidential or vice presidential candidate on a major party ballot in all but two elections between 1868 and 1948, it has been years since the state has had any real impact on the primaries, beyond its limited role as a campaign financer. By the time New Yorkers vote in the state’s primary, the candidates have essentially been chosen.
The real powerhouses are Iowa and New Hampshire. The voters in these two states reap huge financial benefits by acting as early hosts to fledgling and not-so-fledgling presidential campaigns and weed out most contenders before voters have a chance to get to know who’s running. Consequently, the issues that matter to voters of these two states get prominent play.
A growing chorus of critics is rightfully arguing that these two small, primarily rural and homogenous states have too much influence over the process. As a result, the Democratic National Committee has allowed Nevada to hold caucuses in the week between the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary. But this does little to fix the presidential selection process.
Pushing up New York’s primary date, and having other big states push up their dates, will force presidential candidates to be more responsive to a larger array of voters and their concerns. ...
Read entire article at NYT
LEGISLATORS in Albany are discussing the possibility of moving New York’s 2008 presidential primary up a month to Feb. 5, joining states like California, Georgia and New Jersey in their individual attempts to create a new Super Tuesday on the heels of the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary.
Although some are criticizing the move as a transparent effort to help New York’s favorite son, Rudolph Giuliani, and favorite daughter, Hillary Rodham Clinton, win their nominations, moving New York’s primary is a great idea for the state and the country. And Long Islanders, who represent the critical suburban swing voters that decide elections, should be particularly supportive of the move.
The current primary system is a disaster for many states, especially those that have the most voters. And New York is a great example of how this disaster plays out. Though New York was once a goliath of presidential politics with either a presidential or vice presidential candidate on a major party ballot in all but two elections between 1868 and 1948, it has been years since the state has had any real impact on the primaries, beyond its limited role as a campaign financer. By the time New Yorkers vote in the state’s primary, the candidates have essentially been chosen.
The real powerhouses are Iowa and New Hampshire. The voters in these two states reap huge financial benefits by acting as early hosts to fledgling and not-so-fledgling presidential campaigns and weed out most contenders before voters have a chance to get to know who’s running. Consequently, the issues that matter to voters of these two states get prominent play.
A growing chorus of critics is rightfully arguing that these two small, primarily rural and homogenous states have too much influence over the process. As a result, the Democratic National Committee has allowed Nevada to hold caucuses in the week between the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary. But this does little to fix the presidential selection process.
Pushing up New York’s primary date, and having other big states push up their dates, will force presidential candidates to be more responsive to a larger array of voters and their concerns. ...