Aren’t you
tired of the Iowa Caucuses and the New Hampshire primaries? I know I am.
These two states with small largely white populations spread out among
communities that people hear about once every four years take an inordinate
share of the scarce political oxygen. Their
low population densities force politicians to spend an inordinate amount of
time traipsing through them. That
extends the political season for at least three and maybe six months longer
than it needs to be.
On account
of that, I’m making this modest proposal: Henceforth, let the presidential
nominating season start in Maryland.
Yes, I know
I’m affected by a certain chauvinism that attaches to one, such as myself, who
has spent his whole life living in what the local beer brewers used to call the “Land of Pleasant
Living.” And I think it would also be
fair to say that letting Maryland go first would free me to participate in the
process in a way I can’t participate in it now, particularly since climates in
those godforsaken states is far colder than I can easily tolerate.
But even
after we acknowledge my prejudices, you will still have to admit that my
proposal makes a good deal of sense.
The current
era of Presidential voting focuses on base mobilization. For optimizing general election turnout, this
means that whomever a party nominates needs to be a person who is
enthusiastically acceptable to the party’s base nationwide. The momentum that winning the first primary gives a candidate should not go to someone who
won’t appeal to the party’s median voter.
If the GOP
continues to specialize in the preferences of white voters, ethnic diversity doesn’t
much matter. Its candidates will
continue to get primary electorates composed largely of white Republicans
wherever it goes. What the Republicans
ought to be looking for is a state that has places populated by both
Republicans who are most moved by economic and defense issues as well as
Republicans who stress social issues.
The former tend to live in urban and suburban areas while the latter
tend to live in rural areas.
Democrats, though,
find strength in diverse populations. In
the last few national elections, Democrats lost the white vote but prevailed
among ethnic voters by big margins.
From a
demographic standpoint, Maryland fits the bill for both parties. In fact, the state is often called “America inMiniature.” Table 1 shows that
Maryland is far more diverse and
Table 1
Characteristic
|
U.S.
|
Maryland
|
Iowa
|
New Hampshire
|
Population Size
|
N/A
|
5.9 Million
|
3.1 Million
|
1.3 Million
|
Percent White
|
73.81
|
59.06
|
91.39
|
93.83
|
Percent Black
|
12.6
|
29.5
|
3.11
|
1.23
|
Percent Hispanic
|
16.9
|
8.76
|
5.3
|
3.05
|
Percent Asian
|
5
|
5.86
|
1.94
|
2.31
|
Primary Type
|
N/A
|
Closed
|
Semi-closed
|
Semi-closed
|
Source: American
Community Survey Data reported by www.USA.com
representative of the United States as a
whole than either Iowa or New Hampshire.
The latter two states have pitifully small black, Hispanic and Asian
populations, groups Democrats will need in the general election, both now and
in the years to come.
But
Maryland also has a good mix of pro-business Republicans who live in suburban
Baltimore and Anne Arundel counties and rural Republicans who live in Western
Maryland, Southern Maryland and east and south of Baltimore County.
A second advantage
is Maryland’s size. It has about the
same land area as New Hampshire and it is about 6 times smaller than Iowa. That means a politician can start the day at
Deep Creek Lake in Western Maryland, drive to Rockville in Montgomery County
for lunch, drive again to Baltimore for an early dinner and then go ‘downy
ocean’ for an evening fundraiser all in the same day, traffic permitting.
Of course,
all that driving isn’t really necessary.
Maryland’s population density is about 10 times greater than Iowa’s and
more than 3 times greater than New Hampshire’s. That’s because its population
is clustered largely within Central Maryland. That greater density makes it much easier for
politicians to get in front of the voters. That should translate to a much
shorter primary season.
New
Hampshire and Iowa like to tout the experience of their voters in sizing up
presidential candidates.
Please.
They have
nothing on Maryland voters who are much better educated, and, frankly have much
more skin in the game. A large
percentage of Maryland’s population works either for the federal government or
for NGOs and contractors that interact with the federal government on a daily
basis. Just let any one of the current presidential candidates show up at a
Montgomery County town hall meeting with the bucket of horse manure he or she
is trying to pass off in Iowa and New Hampshire as a policy portfolio and see
what happens.
It’s true
that Maryland is a deep blue state. But,
as a matter of fairness that’s another good reason to let Maryland go
first. Iowa and New Hampshire tend to be
“battleground states,” and so they’re likely to get a healthy amount of
attention during the general election campaign.
On the other hand, everyone expects Maryland to vote for the Democratic
presidential candidate, so neither party is going to spend much time here after
the nominating conventions. Letting Maryland go first would give its citizens a
more meaningful role to play during the quadrennial presidential drama.
Finally,
while Iowa allows voters to change their party affiliations on the day of the
caucus and both states allow independent voters to participate as either Democrats
or a Republicans, that’s not allowed in Maryland. Maryland’s rules make it hard for people who
aren’t party identifiers to skew primary election results by crossing over to
the other party in the hope of electing a weaker general election candidate.
So what is
everyone waiting for? There are cases of
Natty Bo chilling in the fridge and crabs steaming in the pot It’s time to start the campaign season in the
original land of the free and the home of the brave.
No comments:
Post a Comment