Top 7 Questions on Florida and Michigan Primaries

[babylonsister]

Top 7 Questions on Florida and Michigan Primaries
By Rachel Kapochunas, CQ Staff

1. What are Florida and Michigan’s 2008 presidential primary dates and how and when were those dates finalized?

On May 21, Florida Republican Gov. Charlie Crist signed legislation into law designating Jan. 29 as the state’s presidential primary date. The primary had been previously scheduled for March.

In Michigan, Democratic Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm signed legislation into law Sept. 4 establishing Jan. 15 as the state’s presidential primary date. But, lower courts in Michigan ruled that the primary process was unconstitutional because Michigan political parties would obtain information regarding voters’ political affiliation through the primary process and that information would not be made public. Voters do not register by party in Michigan. But the State Supreme Court decided Nov. 21 to overturn those rulings and allow the Jan. 15 date to stand.

2. Why did these states and others schedule earlier delegate selection contests?

There is no heir-apparent for either party’s nomination and states are eager to exert influence over the nominating process. In past elections, the opportunities provided by early contests for candidates to gain momentum has resulted in more attention being paid to those states. Other candidates have stumbled in early contests and had to drop out. By the time other states held their primaries, the nominee was already apparent.

The desire to play a role in the nominating process has been so strong that more than 20 states have scheduled one or more party contests on Feb. 5, the earliest date permitted by both parties on which states may hold a contest without penalty.

3. What rules have Florida and Michigan broken by setting these primary dates?

The dates chosen by Florida and Michigan violate both national party rules because they fall before Feb. 5.

Democratic National Committee (DNC) rules stipulate that all but a select handful of states (Iowa- Jan.3 caucus, New Hampshire -Jan. 8 primary, Nevada- Jan. 19 caucus and South Carolina- Jan. 26 primary) are permitted to hold nominating contests earlier than Feb. 5, 2008.

Republican National Committee (RNC) rules state that all states holding binding delegate selection contests prior to Feb. 5 will be penalized, including New Hampshire and South Carolina. Wyoming Republicans also broke RNC rules by scheduling caucuses Jan. 5. The RNC has said it will not penalize Iowa Republicans for holding caucuses Jan. 3 or Nevada Republicans for holding caucuses Jan. 19 because they deem those to be non-binding contests.

New Hampshire traditionally holds the first-in-the-nation primary and Iowa traditionally holds the first caucus in the nation.

more...

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=news-000002636793

[LynneSin]

1. I'll tell you how to solve the problem: ROTATE

Every 4 years you pick 10 states spread throughout the country and allow them the option of having the early primaries. That way, every 20 years each state will have a chance to start off the process.

This is bullshit that Iowa and New Hampshire are somehow the yardstick to determine who should be the nominee - spread the wealth. Primaries bring in big bucks to states that have early primaries/caucuses

[babylonsister]

2. That is a fantastic idea! I think the whole process is unfair as well.

While I will vote in the primary in TX, I often wonder why I should bother since my vote won't count anyway. x(

[gateley]

3. It's been my observation, though, that the people in Iowa and NH take their

standing as a serious responsibility. They pay attention and take the time to research and listen to the candidates. I'm afraid the some other states that don't have the history and tradition of being "first" might be apathetic.