Invented as a way to encourage voter participation, the current primary contest for Democratic and Republican presidential candidacy now fosters a system that leaves the choice in the hands of a few states. If candidates do not win early primaries, they typically drop out of the race before the rest of the nation votes. Now, about 30 states are holding their primaries earlier than previous years, placing extra pressure on election officials.
American City & County asked the readers of its weekly e-newsletter if primaries still serve a function in the political process or if the system should be reformed. Below are some of the responses.
“I would propose developing a primary election ‘season’ to extend over several successive Tuesdays, perhaps in March of each election year. Whichever candidates win the primaries would then become the candidates. [The National Conventions should be reformed] so they [cannot] overrule the results of the primaries.”
— David Bates, environmental compliance administrator, Goshen, Ind.
“I feel that the primaries should all be held on the same day just [like] the general election.”
— Sherman Allred, vice president, Donnell & Allred, Worland, Wyo.
“All primaries should be held on the same day so [everybody has] a say in choosing the candidate that should run for office.”
— Terrie Besier, analyst, Crews & Assoc., Little Rock, Ark.
“The time for direct elections is here, and candidates should be elected by a simple majority. The final candidates could simply be the top two vote-getters in a group runoff.”
— Roger Buffington, utilities supervisor, Grand Rapids, Mich.
“If the election is held during November 2008, the process should not be permitted to start until Jan. 1, 2008. Then, who cares how early the primaries start?”
— George Frangos, senior traffic engineer, Howard County, Md.
“Reform the primary process. All state primaries should be held the same day!”
— Pete Marquardt, financial services consultant, Madison, N.J.
