Primary system shows shortcomings

News stories and headlines about the Democratic primaries are a daily occurrence with the close race between Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.  A constant barrage of headlines and sound-bites exclaim that the primary system is flawed and that its flaws may even lead to a stalemate due to the problems with Florida’s and Michigan’s primaries.  However, the average American has only a vague understanding of how the primary system actually works and therefore cannot see its blatant shortcomings.

This primary season is making it increasingly clear that the Democratic primary system is in serious need of reform.  In recent years there have been several suggestions for reform including a national primary.  This, however, would be more detrimental than beneficial as it would require prospective candidates to campaign simultaneously in every state.  This would cost a great deal of money and would therefore discriminate against less wealthy candidates. 

There is one plan, however, that has the potential to improve the system.  The Rotating Regional Primary System is a system that breaks the U.S. into four regions. The first year, a lottery would decide which region would have the first primary beginning a rotation system.  From that point on, the regions would cycle through positions for who had their primaries on which date.  Iowa’s caucus and New Hampshire’s primary would not be included in any of these regions and would still open the primary season.

This system would be better than the current system for several reasons.  First, the fact that the regions are broken down by geographic location, candidates would have a lower cost of campaigning in this system as opposed to a national primary.  Many critics still argue that the regions are so large that this system would still discriminate against less wealthy candidates.  This, however, is counteracted by the exclusion of Iowa and New Hampshire from these regions.  In doing this, they allow for less funded candidates to begin campaigning in only two states;  the idea being that if they are viable candidates, they can build up momentum in these two states and subsequently raise enough money to campaign elsewhere. 

Secondly, this system would eliminate the competition between states that are vying for position.  This has become one of the most significant benefits because of the scandal in Michigan and Florida this year.  Because Michigan and Florida moved their primaries ahead of schedule, they were penalized; their delegates will not be seated at the Democratic National Convention.  The controversy created by this penalty is mainly due to the close race between the Democratic candidates which could end in neither candidate reaching the required number of delegates to get the nomination. 

Finally, this system ensures a more democratic process by holding a lottery to determine the order of rotation between the regions.  The current system has the democratic national committee controlling the order.  Creating a lottery would ensure a fair and democratic order.  
   
One flaw in this new system would be the continuation of super delegates. The Democratic Party has 793 delegates known as super delegates who are representing only themselves and may vote for who they wish at the national convention.  These individuals are elite members of the Democratic Party who are expected to choose the candidate that they feel is best for the party.  But is it really democratic to have one super delegate’s vote counting for more than the vote of a pledged delegate who is representing hundreds of people’s votes?
   
The primary system is an extremely intricate and at times utterly confusing system in desperate need of reform.  Americans need to be able to understand the system in which they are voting without having to have a degree in politics.  The Rotating Regional Primary System helps to make the process more easily understood as well as being more democratic.