Story Created:
Mar 7, 2008 at 9:31 PM EST
Story Updated:
Mar 7, 2008 at 11:53 PM EST
Local congressmen do not want to overhaul the primary system, but other leaders think otherwise and have introduced a bill to reform the system.
The Democratic National Committee punished Michigan for moving its primary ahead by taking away delegates. Michigan is now considering a caucus to get those delegate votes back.
The bigger question is whether the country's primary system works.
Before the problems with Michigan and Florida, Congress was already taking a look at the system. Rep. Sandy Levin, D-Michigan, and Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Florida, introduced a bill last fall that would assign states to one of six primaries through a lottery.
Local congressmen say it's not a good idea because it would guarantee the richest candidate a win.
Rep. Fred Upton, R-Michigan, and Rep. Mark Souder, D-Indiana, say they don't think problems with Michigan and Florida moving their primaries are a big enough deal to change the country's primary system.
"I supported what Michigan did in terms of going January 15," said Upton.
"I believe the current system is working well for sorting candidates," said Souder.
Others, like Levin, want the system changed.
The proposal would divide the country into six regions. Within each region, a lottery would be held to determine which of the six primaries each state would take part in. That would allow each region to be represented in each primary.
"The last thing we need is Congress getting involved. This is the parties. The parties need to set up their own rules," said Upton.
"The problem is the regional primary system is that it would force candidates to go between multiple areas simultaneously, and it would become a campaign for those that can raise the most money and do the most media appearances," said Souder.
He doubts whether the changes would have made a difference this year.
"I doubt whether it being earlier would have had a difference in John McCain winning, and I doubt it being earlier or having a regional primary system would have had an impact on whether it was Clinton or Obama," said Souder.
But if more states move their primaries ahead to January in 2012: "Then we'll have to take some action. The regional system might be the best way to do it. It sounds the most fair," said Souder.
This plan was introduced in the Senate and House last September and has gotten support from Michigan's Republican Party chairman and Michigan Democratic activists.
The Republican Party is expected to discuss their own primary reform at their convention later this year.
Saturday, Mar 8 at 2:46 PM Simple wrote ...
Why not a national primary? Well, we don't have national elections now. Most people don't realize this, but the highest office anyone votes for is their state's governor. We live in a federal republic, not a unitary democracy, and having the states being able to decide things keeps the coastal cities from deciding things for us.