Seen at Stateline.org, it seems that a few government officials are finding the front-loading of the 2008 primaries to be a bit nutty:
The National Association of Secretaries of State has dusted off its proposal to divide states into regions – the East, South, Midwest and West – and hold four primaries, each a month apart, between March and June. All states in a region would schedule their primaries on the same day. The order of the contests would rotate every presidential election year.
New Hampshire and Iowa would retain their positions as the first two states to choose a presidential nominee.
I can see a few folks taking issue with this proposal due to lack of heterogeneity in some regions.
If I were designing a primary schedule scheme, I would be extremely tempted to simply randomize the process. I’d randomly draw states representing 1/6th of the population to form a February, a March, and an April mega-primary…and then have the remaining roughly half of the country form a May mega-primary.
Randomization would increase the odds of getting a good mix of different constituencies represented early on in the process. Limiting the first three primary waves to 1/6th of the country each would presumably keep campaigning manageable long enough for less-well-established candidates to get their message out. And, focusing half the population at the end of the process would keep the voters of all states relevant to the primary process, by not necessarily having a winner preordained before the end of primary season.
Of course, my willingness to do this assumes that these were all open primaries. The idea that my tax dollars are going to help run elections that I’m not allowed to vote in bothers me.
But that’s a rant for another day.