Pennsylvania Primary Approaches

How ironic is it that the DNC’s worst nightmare has become Pennsylvania’s good fortune? Hats off to the Keystone state, I say. Because in recent weeks it has become clear that Pennsylvania is one of the few and the proud, in that it remains one of the last vestiges of how the primary system was actually supposed to work.

Over the last few decades, primaries have largely served the purpose of opening up the electoral process. Though they have opened up the process, however, they have also simultaneously closed it off for many voters. Take, for instance, the deluge of states that held primaries or caucuses on this year’s “Super Tuesday”: on February 5, 2008, 24 different states selected their candidates from both the Republican and Democratic parties (with the exception of the five states that only chose from one party’s candidates). So this means that on a single day, almost half of the fifty states that comprise the United States of America voted to select each major party’s nominee for President. It was a classic instance of the primary system’s greatest flaw: frontloading, which is when each state keeps moving its primary/caucus up earlier and earlier. The states do this because in theory, the earlier that a state holds its primary or caucus, the more power it will have over choosing who will be the nominees. So each state is essentially trying to exert the same amount of weight that Iowa and New Hampshire do as the nation’s first caucus and primary, respectively.

The national parties are fine with this; the sooner they know their nominees, the sooner they can start discrediting the other side. So if a party can decide its nominee a whole six months before the actual nominating Convention, it just gives them more time to get ready for the general election. It worked fine for the Republicans, seeing as Senator John McCain emerged the presumptive nominee following Super Tuesday, although it didn’t help the Democrats considering that the two major nominees, Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, are still left to fight for the nomination (in Villanova’s own state of Pennsylvania, no less). But maybe what’s best for the parties isn’t actually what’s best for the voters. If the primaries and caucuses were spread out more, the voters would have more options. Who knows; it’s possible that if the primaries and caucuses were spread further apart between the months of February and August, the outcome would have been entirely different. A big factor concerning the candidates is momentum; it’s why Mr. Obama was so confident after Super Tuesday, and it’s why Mrs. Clinton had an upswing after Ohio and Texas. Maybe, though, if the Super Tuesday states spread their nominations out, Mr. Romney or Mr. Huckabee would have gained enough momentum to continue to battle Mr. McCain (as the Democrats currently are) or even to beat him.

Even better, spreading out the primaries and caucuses would make the candidates focus on more of the states. Right now, frontloading prevents candidates from focusing everywhere. True, smaller states with fewer delegates probably still wouldn’t get a whole lot of attention, but maybe if a small state had the only primary/caucus that week, a candidate would focus on it, hoping for a momentum boost. Just look at Pennsylvania now; it’s getting the attention that it finally deserves. Recently, Mr. Obama has come out and said that he would consider coming within ten points of Mrs. Clinton in Pennsylvania to be a big win. But by downplaying the importance of the Keystone state, he is not giving it the credit it deserves- because the reality is that Pennsylvania is important. Now in the midst of the primary season, it can either secure Mr. Obama the nomination or lend credence to Mrs. Clinton’s claim that she has been winning all the big states and is more electable. And further down the road, in the general election it offers 21 electoral votes and is a key swing state. So why shouldn’t it get the attention that it deserves now in the primary season? Were the nomination sewed up before now, much like it was for the Republicans, Pennsylvania would be a formality; a publicity stop en route to the Conventions. However, now it gets the chance that it deserves, and the candidates are forced to campaign and focus on the issues that matter here. By holding such a late primary, Pennsylvania would typically lose out on deciding who the major party candidates for president would be. But finally, Pennsylvania’s respect for the process pays off and it receives the same focus that Iowa and New Hampshire do- the focus that all states should have; the focus that it rightfully deserves.