One Person - No Vote Part 1: The Primaries

Berber Cameleers in Morocco - photo by JoAnn Sturman

Scott Sturman
fliesinyoureyes.com

If one resides in California, chances are the presidential candidates for the upcoming election were chosen weeks before the state primary. For a conservative living in California and voting in the general election, not only does one not have a voice in the selection of the candidate, but your vote in this heavily Democratic state plays no roll in electing the President. This double dose of disenfranchisement is due to the exaggerated influence of early primaries held in sparsely populated states.

In the dead of winter in presidential election years prospective candidates trudge through the snow to court the voters of New Hampshire and Iowa. The stakes are enormous, for although New Hampshire has less than 0.5% and Iowa less than 1% of the country's population, the outcome will determine which candidates will be labeled as winners and move on to the next round. A candidate may have broad appeal in California which is home to 12% of the country or in many other states for that matter. However, the opinion of 1.5% of the United States' population trumps more populous states voting later in the election cycle. In fact candidates rarely make more than cameo appearances in non swing states which hold late elections, since the nominees usually are decided before the states' primary.

Staggering the times of primaries over months nullifies the vote of millions whose states hold late primaries. It prolongs the election cycle and adds to the outlandish costs of the process. Being first grants notoriety and offers powerful financial rewards to these states' economies. The ability to greatly effect the selection of the presidential candidates from both parties by a handful
of small states has a less evident, yet sinister aspect.

Isolated primaries in isolated states permit less well known but highly funded politicians backed by special interest groups to concentrate their efforts in a media rich environment. The candidate's popularity and suitability are exaggerated easily by sympathetic journalists whose philosophies coincide with the chosen one. Constantly in the limelight, the image is polished and refined for weeks as the American people are inundated with carefully orchestrated news pieces.

As in the general elections, holding all state primaries and caucuses on the same day allows everyone to participate fairly in candidate selection. It encourages candidates to campaign throughout the country to woo all voters. Scheduling the primaries a few weeks ahead of the Democratic and Republican National Conventions affords greater competition among the candidates, since many would remain on the ballot in all states at primary time. In many cases a clear winner may not be evident at national convention time. With no one person having a clear majority of voter support, the conventions would be a revitalized into a hot bed of competition rather than another carefully plotted Hollywood production. Lastly, concentrating the primaries makes it more difficult for manipulators with extraordinary resources to concentrate their efforts in small population centers and use political momentum to launch their candidate to the general election and to the Presidency of the United States.