Cross-party voting in Political Primaries

Several states allow people registered with one party to vote in the primary of the other party. Some unethical people take advantage of this situation to disrupt the outcome of the primary in that state.

After careful study I have determined that this is not a significant problem. Where it is a problem the best solutions are with the candidates and with the people, not the election system. However there are some system changes to be made as well.

In the spirit of democracy I would like to believe that the citizen can vote in the primary of whichever party he chooses. However, in practical political life, there are unethical citizens from both parties do cross party voting to affect the outcome. What this means is that the election results of the primaries in those states cannot always be trusted.

The best solution lies the political leadership and the people. The leadership should discourage cross party voting just to disrupt elections. Nothing good comes of such activity. The leadership should encourage ethical voting behavior at all times.

The second solution lies with the candidates themselves. If there seems to be a significant amount of cross party voting, then the candidates should have a healthy distrust of the election results. Don’t drop out based on the results of that state. Campaign in other states and see if the trend is any different.

Regarding changes in the primary system, the political parties can test the validity of election results using their own methods. The best indicator of voting accuracy is to poll the members of the political party. One state convention will do. In larger states, the political party can hold several conventions in major cities.

Entrance to these conventions will be restricted to party faithful. Then the convention will have a  non-binding straw poll of the members. If the straw poll of the party faithful is similar to the results of the official primary, then the election results can be trusted. If not, then the party leadership will be quick to note the difference, and caution the candidates not to trust the official results.

I am opposed to mandating proof of political allegiance from the government when voting in the primary. This adds an extra layer of bureaucracy. It also denies the honest citizens (who believe that the other party really does offer the best choices that year) an opportunity to encourage the best candidate. Instead, it is best to have mechanisms like the party straw poll. The political party is a private entity, and they rent a private facility for their convention. They can restrict access and check party loyalty easily and without legal concern.

New Plan for Political Primaries: Details of the Plan

Overview

The current system of political primaries is seriously flawed. The major problems are:

1. Candidates drop out too soon. Candidates drop out of the race before citizens get a chance to know and vote on these candidates.

2. Citizens of several regions of the country have been denied their right to vote.

3. This results in candidates on the November ballot who are not the people’s choice, and who are far from the best options for leading the nation.

In order to fix this problem we need an overhaul of the political primary system. This is the Plan to fix the political system.

Over the last several years I have been studying the issue, proposing ideas, and getting feedback. Today I am ready to offer the details of the final plan to the general public.

The Plan to Overhaul the Political Primary System: In Brief

1. The nation will be divided into 8 Regions.

2. One state from each region will represent the region in the round of Early Primaries.

3. Only after all Early Primaries are completed will a candidate consider dropping out.

4. At this point the second set of primaries takes place: each large state gets to vote on candidates.

5. After the series of Big State Primaries, candidates then have an option to drop out.

6. Remaining states will have their primaries, including Super Tuesday type primaries, until the final candidates are chosen.

The 8 Regions: Purpose of the Regions

The purpose of the Regions is to ensure that all areas of the country have an equal say in choosing the final candidate from each party. A win or loss for a candidate from one region is meaningless. Each region has different cultures, different histories, and different concerns.

All regions must be considered in the Early Primaries. The only useful criteria for a candidate when deciding whether to continue or drop out is considering the total results from all regions of the nation.

Representative State

The concept of Early Primaries does have some logical sense. It is logical for some states to be the initial weeding out states on behalf of the others. However, at the same time, states which participate in Early Primaries must, in total, represent all regions of the nation. To have only a few states represent the nation in Early Primaries, without considering the needs of all other regions, is not in the spirit of democracy or considering the nation as a whole.

The Regions as listed on this Plan will be created by the political party leadership in each state, along with the leadership of the national party. Then one state from each region will be chosen by the fellow states in that Region as the representative in Early Primaries.

How the states in that region choose their Early Primary state is entirely up to them. Furthermore, the same state can be used each time, or each state can serve as the representative in rotation.

The 8 Regions: List of Regions

The Regions for this Political Primary System are based on similar culture, similar daily life, and similar concerns. The groupings are based on elements which tie those states together, based on my experience with each of those states.

A. New England Region: Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut.

B. Mid-Atlantic Region: New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland.

C. Great Lakes Region: Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana.

D. Mid-West Region: Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota.

E. Rockies and Far West Region: Colorado, Montana, Idaho, Oregon, Washington State, Alaska, Hawaii, California.

F. Southwest Region: Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, Texas.

G. Appalachian Region and Southern States: Missouri, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia, South Carolina, North Carolina.

H. Gulf States: Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida.

Largest States: The Privilege and Reasons

Each of the Largest States have a special place in the new Political Primary System. The most populous states have the greatest number of voting citizens, the greatest number of electoral votes, and therefore should have a significant say in who the candidates should be in the upcoming general election.

Furthermore, in the current system the people of the larger states often want candidates who have dropped out. These candidates could have gotten elected had they campaigned in these larger states.

Therefore, by giving the larger states a greater priority in the primary system, the people of these states have more options, the people will no longer be deprived of their vote, and the people will get their choice in candidate. Similarly, the best candidates will continue in the race, and perhaps be elected, rather than dropping out of the race before the people have spoken.

You will notice that in this plan the largest states have NOT been granted Early Primary Status. However, at the same time, these states deserve more than the current system of being disenfranchised. As a compromise, the largest states will be granted the right to have their voting between the Early Voting states and the Super Tuesday states.

Largest States: Practical Details

After the complete set of Early Primaries is completed, for all Regions, then some candidates will drop out. Yet many candidates will remain. Those candidates that remain will campaign in the largest states.

The Large State Primaries must include California, Texas, New York, and Florida. These states are consistently in the top four of population.

The Large State Primaries might also include any one or more of the following: Ohio, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts. However, these states may be better used as representatives in their respective Regions.

Due to the size and significance of the large states, each primary will be held no sooner than one week after the previous primary. The candidates need enough time to interact with the people of many regions in that state.

As with Early Primaries, candidates must campaign in ALL large states before dropping out. This will prevent states from jockeying back and forth to have the earliest date. If no candidate drops out until after primaries from all large states have been completed, then it does not matter which state is first.

Campaigning in Large States

Candidates should campaign in each large state. Furthermore, candidates should be encouraged to campaign in several major regions within each state. Only then will the citizens be able to learn of their candidates. Only then will the candidates have the opportunity to get the maximum number of votes from the people.

Certainly money is a concern when campaigning in large states. However, under this plan, only the total results matter, not the individual states. If a candidate wishes to focus on one large state over another because he believes it is most effective, then he can do so. However, candidates who avoid states or avoids regions of states are depriving themselves the option of being elected.

Dropping out after election in All Large States

As stated above, the second point at which a candidate can drop out is after the series of elections in all large states. It is important to remember that no single large state should dictate the choice in candidates. Therefore it is imperative that no candidate drop out until after the results of the elections in all large states.

Political Primaries of Remaining States

At this point the remaining states can have their primaries. At this point, much of the current system can be intact.

Each state can choose when it wants its primary, including the jockeying back and forth of who goes first. Block voting days such as Super Tuesdays are also allowed.

Why Larger States get to Vote before Super Tuesday states

It is important to remember why the large states get priority over remaining states, including block voting of states.

The large states have more electoral votes than any of the smaller states, and block voting as in Super Tuesday does not always translate to acquiring block electoral votes in the general election. Therefore large states must be given priority over Super Tuesday states when choosing candidates in the primaries.

Just as important, in the current system many candidates drop out after block voting without letting the largest states have the opportunity to vote. In the new plan the order of primaries are reversed, which force the candidates to campaign in the largest states.

The candidates can still choose to campaign in the Super Tuesday states. Nothing is prohibiting the candidates from campaigning into all the other states after the largest states have spoken. Yet the new order of primaries will force the candidates to campaign in the largest states. The new order of primaries will give the citizens of the largest states the opportunity to vote for a greater number of candidates.

Summary and Conclusion

The current political primary system is broken. Candidates drop out too soon, candidates do not visit major states or metropolitan regions, and citizens are denied opportunities to vote. This results in candidates who were not chosen by the people. This also results in candidates who do not understand the needs of the nation, instead focusing on a few regions or special interest groups. The job of President is important, and therefore the flawed primary system must be fixed.

Under this plan, the political primaries will be returned to the people. The major steps of this plan are:

1. The nation will be divided into 8 Regions.

2. One state from each region will represent the region in the round of Early Primaries.

3. Only after all Early Primaries are completed will a candidate consider dropping out.

4. The second set of primaries takes place: each of the largest states gets to vote on candidates.

5. After the entire series of large state primaries, candidates then have an option to drop out.

6. Remaining states will have their primaries, including Super Tuesday type primaries, until the final candidates are chosen.

For the good of our nation, please distribute and promote this plan as widely as possible.

New Plan for Political Primaries: Overview of the Plan

We agree that the political primary system has major flaws. The flaws are evident by the fact that candidates drop out too soon and many citizens are denied the chance to vote for good candidates.

I have been studying political elections for over 20 years, and I have been working on the problem of flawed political primaries since 1996. During this time I have been proposing ideas, discussing with colleagues, and getting feedback. The final plan is ready for the general public.

The main points of the Plan are as follows:

1. The nation will be divided into 8 Regions.

2. One state from each region will represent the region in Early Primaries.

3. Only after ALL Early Primaries are completed will a candidate consider dropping out.

4. At this point the second set of primaries takes place. Each of the Largest States gets to vote on candidates. The Big State Primaries should include the states usually in the top 4: California, Texas, New York, and Florida.

           

5. After the series of Big State Primaries, candidates then have an option to drop out. (The candidates should go through all the Big State Primaries before dropping out, in order to make the most educated decision.)

6. Remaining states will vote until the final candidate from each party is selected.

The end result will allow for the greatest number of candidates to remain as choices for citizens in all regions. From this, the best candidates will be elected during the primary.

Details of the Plan will be in the next blog.

Current Primary System: Problem Statement

The current political primary system is broken. We do not get the best candidates. More significantly, we do not get the candidates the citizens truly want.

This has been an issue to varying degrees for years. The all time low occurred in 2008 when John McCain was thrust upon the Republican Party, though less than 1% of the population wanted McCain as their candidate. In November, many hard-core Republicans across the nation held their nose while voting for McCain; while many other Republicans didn’t vote at all.

A candidate thrust upon the party which was odorous to the party members? How could this be?

I have been working on the problem of flawed political primaries since 1996, but 2008 was  the year that provided absolute proof to a many citizens that the political primary system must be fixed.

The problems are various and they are intertwined. The main problems in the political primary system over the last 20 years have been:

1. Most candidates drop out too soon

2. Not all regions are heard before candidates drop out

3. Smaller states have too much power, able to dictate candidate choices over larger and more populous states.

4. Big states are not given a chance to vote for candidates.

5. Candidates rarely visit the larger states.

These points will be expanded on below.

1. The biggest problem in the primary system is that the candidates drop out too soon. Candidates drop out of the race long before the rest of the nation has a chance to vote. How can the people of a state choose the best candidate if the options are eliminated before election day?

2. Not all regions are heard before candidates drop out. A win or a loss in one state does not mean anything when compared to the other states. The United States is very large, with diverse geography and cultures. All regions must be allowed to vote.

3. Smaller states have too much power. They are able to dictate candidate choices over larger and more populous states. I’ve spent most of my life in Texas and California, and I have been repeatedly irked by the power of states like New Hampshire and Iowa in the political primaries. The same thing happens every Presidential campaign. In Iowa and New Hampshire there are a dozen candidates on the ballot. In Texas and California we get only one or two candidates. Shouldn’t the most populous states have as many options for candidates in the primary as the smaller states? This seems only reasonable and fair.

4. Big states are not given a chance to vote for candidates. This is a crucial point, important enough to restate. As stated in #3, the larger states do not get a chance to vote for candidates. Although Texas and California are always the most populous states, the people are not given options for candidates. In essence, the larger states have become disenfranchised. The people of these states are not given the same voting rights as the people in other states.

We could also look at this from another way: electoral votes. The larger states have more electoral votes. Therefore it is only logical that these states have a greater say in which candidates get on the November ballot.

5. Candidates rarely visit the larger states. This is also a big problem. At best, if the candidate does visit the state, this candidate makes one campaign stop in the state, focusing on only one region. More commonly, most candidates make zero appearances in a larger state. No candidate, no interaction with the people. Nothing.

Every election cycle dozens of candidates travel back and forth throughout the small states like New Hampshire and Iowa. Towns are over run with candidates. They are everywhere, visiting delis and flipping pancakes. And yet in Texas and California? Nothing. Silence. Candidates don’t go to cafes and talk directly with the people. The candidates don’t even come to the state!

I have lived in the largest cities of these two large states over the past 20 years, and rarely has a presidential candidate come to visit. In fact, in all those years and all those cities I have only heard of two candidates in my metropolitan regions, and I have only seen one candidate.

Why don’t these candidates visit? This is mostly due to elitist thinking by candidates and their campaign managers. They see these states as not worth bothering with. This faulty, elitist thinking must be changed. Why should a citizen vote for a candidate that doesn’t care enough to visit that citizen’s state? I know many citizens who stay home on election day precisely because of this reason.

If we are to fix the primary system then there are three elements that must be met:

1. All regions of the United States must have a voice before candidates drop out.

2. States which are larger and/or more populous must be offered a variety of candidates.

3. Candidates must make the effort to visit with the people of all regions more frequently.

Next Blog: Overview of the Plan

New Plan for Political Primaries

New Plan for Political Primaries: Executive Summary

The current political primary system is broken. Good candidates drop out too soon. Smaller states are dictating candidates, over the desires of larger and more populous states. The nation is NOT getting the best candidates for November elections. For the good of the nation and its citizens, this must be changed.

I have a plan to fix this system. The plan you see before you is one I have been working on for many years. The plan has evolved and has been refined until it has reached the point where I am satisfied that is suitable to present it to the general public.

In brief, the plan works as follows: There will be THREE TIERS of elections during the primary season, and only TWO POINTS at which candidates may drop out. This will result in the greatest number of citizens voting in the primaries, and will result in the best candidates being selected for the general election in November.

In the next several blogs I will discuss the details of the problem, and more importantly, I will present and explain the plan which will provide the solutions.

Next blog: Problem Statement