Primaries Place Two States Above Nation

The only ones in the country who seem distasteful of such a common sense idea are, not surprisingly, Iowa and New Hampshire.

Iowa and New Hampshire are the traditional American states that set the pace for national elections.

(SALEM, Ore.) - Is it just me or is the national brouhaha about primary election dates looking like a bunch of piglets racing to the trough at feeding time?

In perennial oneupsmanship New Hampshire's laws state they must be first therefore their date automatically advances every time some other state advances theirs. Iowa, too, seems wedded to the "we are first' concept.

Both are positions that anger those in other states who rightly, to me at least, feel that by the time they get to vote the decision has pretty much already been made. Where do Iowa and New Hampshire get off claiming their 'first among equals' status?

I would personally like to see, just as we have a single national day for federal elections, there being a single federal national day for primaries/caucuses. Everyone votes on the same day.

The only ones in the country who seem distasteful of such a common sense idea are, not surprisingly, Iowa and New Hampshire.

These two states love the attention they get. Not surprising, who wouldn't?

They also love the massive amount of political money that gets expended in their states.

They whine and cry that if there were a single national day all the political budgets would be spent in key electoral states such as California, Texas, New York and Illinois and such. But why shouldn't that be the case since clearly that is where most of the voters are?

But it is also a claim not based, in my humble opinion, on reality.

My assessment is that the dollars would instead go to national ads instead of localized ones... on the national networks and cable TV channels so that the positions would not change as much as they currently do from one venue to another. The ads currently change depending on which state they are targeting. If there was one national primary/caucus day then, like the November election ads, the substance would in a national election be more homogeneous, as it should be. No promising illegals support in one state while promising crackdowns on illegals in another for example.

And there would be nothing to stop campaigns from running localized ads, but those ads would be watched and reacted to by opponents looking to paint the opponents as hypocrites.

All in all the public good would be served by a single national primary day just as it is by a single national election day. Wouldn't most of the states' voters scream foul if the actual elections were held like the primaries are? Of course they would and with good reason! Everyone needs to feel like and believe that their vote counts just as much as anyone else's. And that is not the case currently with this unfair and unequal primary system where by the time most get to vote the decision has presumptively been made already. It is a bitter pill to swallow being told your vote is merely a formality.

Here in Salem, Oregon, this often means low voter turnouts for elections which, considering the annoying 'double majority' law, dooms many popularly supported levies and measures due to voter apathy fueled low voter turnout caused in large part by this situation in primary elections.

So let us end this BS we are seeing this election year once and for all and just institute a single national primary day, say the first Tuesday in March, and be done with this distractive nonsense and get on to focusing on the issues, ok?