4 users logged on

Tips: BlueJerseyDotCom (AIM) |

An ATM, a Reduced Delegation, or Both?

by: JRB

Mon Jan 22, 2007 at 05:09:17 PM EST

In this morning New York Times, a top advisor to John McCain commented on states' rush to the front of the primary calendar.

All of these states, who are moving up early, want to play and have an impact. But oddly enough, it ultimately will limit the legitimate candidate choices for the nation at large in the primary process.

To counter that, the Democratic National Committee is considering a rule at their upcoming winter meeting that would penalize states for moving up. Wally Edge is reporting that,

The move would reduce the size of state's delegation by as much as 30% as a penalty for moving their primaries to the first Tuesday in February. California is among the state's considering a February 5, 2008 primary; the California Senate President and Assembly Speaker have asked Democratic National Chairman Howard Dean to reject the proposal.

In his 2005 state of the state address, Dick Codey said that moving up the primary would "make New Jersey a Presidential player instead of an ATM machine for Presidential candidates." Maybe so.

But if the move came at the expense of the size of the convention delegation, it could reduce New Jersey's role in Presidential politics.

In the first place, if California, Michigan, North Carolina, Missouri, and Delaware all move their primaries to February 5 (the earliest any states can move up), New Jersey will be competing with several major players and their cheaper media markets. And this doesn't include Florida and other Western states that are also rumbling about a move.

Not to mention the dynamic of this particular presidential year. Some, like National Journal's Chuck Todd, are suggesting that the presence of two or three heavyweights could lead to extremely well-financed campaign organizations with no quit in them -- leading to a delegate fight at the national convention.

If New Jersey sacrifices a chunk of its delegation for a handful of campaign stops and maybe a few million dollars in additional revenue, will it be worth it?

JRB :: An ATM, a Reduced Delegation, or Both?

Tags: 2008, President, primary, election, (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

An ATM, a Reduced Delegation, or Both? | 5 comments

Yes, although... (0.00 / 0)

...it will be interesting to see if this rule change will deter the state Democratic establishment's desire to play a role in Presidential politics.

I don't think that the potential revenue from Presidential campaign activity will equal the cost of a separate primary election, so that is not much of an incentive. New Jersey could reduce their costs by having an Iowa-style caucus instead of a primary, but I doubt that will happen.

Another interesting thing about the Democratic establishment's interest in being a player in Presidential politics is that it flies in the face of their historical tendencies. In the past, they have always enjoyed their last in the nation status, because it prevented them from having to take sides and enabled them to coalesce around the winner.

In 2000, State Senator Ray Lesniak, the Union County party boss, backed Al Gore early, even though he was being challenged by the state's "favorite son", Bill Bradley. The word on the street was that he was angling for the ambassadorship to France.

In 2004 (actually 2003), the state Democratic establishment made an unusually bold move, spurred on by Dick Codey's and Bob Menendez's behind-the-scenes manuevering when they endorsed Howard Dean before the primary season had even begun.

But other than that, the state Democratic establishment had traditionally been comfortable staying out of the highly risky and rarely rewarding Presidential selection process.

I guess there could be some who think that had New Jersey had an earlier primary, their support could have helped Howard Dean get a win that would have given him a boost following 3rd and 2nd place finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire respectively.

Maybe others are laying the groundwork for 2012 or 2016 when Governor Jon Corzine could be a Presidential primary contestant. If that's the case, they might be willing to sacrifice delegates in 2008 if those delegates are reinstated by 2012.

Either way, it will be interesting to see what the DNC decides at their winter meeting and what the state Democratic establishment response to their decision is.

Stay Tuned!

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Mon Jan 22, 2007 at 22:31:31 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

re: Democratic Establishment (0.00 / 0)

Who are you referring to when you use that term? I personally take it to mean the State Party organization, which i do not believe endorsed anyone in the 2004 presidential primary.

Additionally, Gov. McGreevey was the first to endorse Gov. Dean, following several meetings at Drumthwacket, and Chair BWC followed, but as individuals, not as the leaders of the state party.

by: ridethedonkey @ Tue Jan 23, 2007 at 03:07:16 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

TOO BAD (0.00 / 0)

Lesniak didn't go to France. Then he wouldn't have been messing up Union County the way he has been for the past few years!

by: krose @ Tue Jan 23, 2007 at 05:08:03 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I want a vote (0.00 / 0)

Better 7/10 of a vote than none at all. And it won't be that a big penalty -- when you see "as much as 30%", whether it is a sale from a store or a tax by a politician -- it means much less than 30% in practice. Whether Feb 12 with no penalty would be better I can't say. Russert at this moment is saying that the first 4 states will decide the nomination. Maybe it will be a brokered convention (that would be entertaining!) It seems most likely that the Feb 5 results will be the key, so I'd want NJ to be part of it.

I heard rumors that NH will move up later this year regardless of what the DNC wants.

Frank LoBiondo Record and Jon Runyan Watch

by: Hopeful @ Mon Jan 22, 2007 at 23:43:41 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Yeah (0.00 / 0)

New Hampshire state law is they set their primary for whenever they want it. Really, their only option is to jump two weeks ahead (thereby one week before Iowa -- they could never do it one day after).

by: JRB @ Tue Jan 23, 2007 at 00:03:09 AM UTC

[ Parent ]