Washington – A Democratic Party commission voted Saturday to dilute the influence of Iowa and New Hampshire in the presidential nomination process and to open the crucial early weeks of the 2008 primary season to more Western, Southern and minority voters.
The commission’s recommendation – to add one or two state caucuses and inject more diversity between Iowa’s first-in-the- nation caucus and New Hampshire’s premier primary – is only advisory.
But Colorado’s Michael Stratton, a commission member who argued for a greater Western role in the process, said the decision reflects a gathering Democratic consensus that a state from the West be one chosen to precede New Hampshire.
The text of the report, and an accompanying letter, stresses the growing importance of Western voters – and their Southern counterparts – to the party and recognizes the growing influence of Hispanics.
“We had, for the West, a great success here,” Stratton said.
If a coalition of other Western states proceeds with a proposed regional primary immediately after New Hampshire, he noted, the West could be a significant player in the politics of 2008.
Stratton said Nevada is the leading candidate to jump into the slot between Iowa and New Hampshire.
Donald Fowler, another member of the commission and a former party chairman, said Colorado, New Mexico or Arizona are candidates as well.
Colorado dropped its presidential primary for cost reasons in 2004, and Democrats instead held caucuses that spring. Colorado Democrats could move their caucuses by themselves, Stratton said, but would need state action to return to a primary election in 2008.
“This is at least a slight crack in that wall that two states have built around their privileged positions,” said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Michigan, a prime mover within Democratic circles for the proposed changes. “We shouldn’t have a rule that some states are more equal than others.”
New Hampshire representatives opposed the commission’s conclusions and vowed to carry their fight to the party rules committee and the Democratic National Committee, which meets this spring.
Former New Hampshire Gov. Jeanne Shaheen defended her state’s status, noting how its small size and population allowed under-funded, little-known candidates to employ “retail politics” and connect with the voters.
New Hampshire “has provided a place where candidates who may not have the most support or are best financed can come and talk to the voters,” Shaheen said.
Former Colorado senator and presidential candidate Gary Hart urged Democrats, in an op-ed column in The Boston Globe last week, not to terminate New Hampshire’s status.
“Don’t move New Hampshire into the background just to provide larger playing fields for political consultants and interest-group candidates,” Hart wrote. “A new candidate from a small state with no money, however interesting, provocative, or challenging his or her ideas are, will not stand a chance.”
The commission report voiced a concern shared by many party leaders that Iowa and New Hampshire do not reflect the diversity of the American electorate. The panel also recommended that Democrats negotiate with Republican leaders and agree on rules to further change the calendar, and perhaps end the lofty status of Iowa and New Hampshire entirely, in 2012.
