The California Plan: A 21st Century Method for Nominating Presidential Candidates

The traditional schedule of presidential primaries and caucuses is simply that—a tradition—one which evolved piecemeal over a period of decades, without any systemic architecture. Iowa and New Hampshire always go first because . . . they are Iowa and New Hampshire. Originally, the other states’ primaries and caucuses were spread fairly evenly throughout the spring season, leading up to the nominating conventions in the summer. Whereas now there are only a handful of states that do not hold presidential primaries, prior to the McGovern reforms in the early 1970s, only a third of the states held such primaries. In those pre-reform days, instead of the delegates of a state being chosen in one day as in a primary election, they were usually selected in the course of a long process beginning with precinct caucuses, running through district or county caucuses, and culminating in state conventions. The process of selecting a party’s presidential candidate was the aggregation of decisions made in thousands of smokefilled rooms. Such a process did not lend itself to as much media attention nor to a sense of a candidacy building momentum. Rather, there was more the sense that the delegate selection processes in each state were relatively isolated, exerting little influence on each other. In such an environment, there was little perceived advantage in a state choosing its delegates early. The McGovern reforms changed this process. Over the next two decades, more states switched to primaries, which attracted more media attention. The concept of campaign momentum took shape; with increasing frequency, candidates without sufficient momentum dropped out of the race before the national conventions. Eventually, states realized that they could exert more influence over the process and the candidates, as well as attract more campaign expenditures and media coverage, if they moved their primaries to the beginning of the season. The more the system shifted from caucuses to primaries, the more incentive it created for front-loading. This was the unintended, adverse consequence of the McGovern reforms. The first significant break with tradition came in 1988, when a bloc of southern states decided to hold their primaries on the same Tuesday in March, calling it “Super Tuesday.” But any state or region of the country can play that game, and in the years since many have. In 1996, California (a region in its own right) moved its presidential primary from the first Tuesday in June to the second Tuesday in March; still not content with that, the most populous state in the union moved its primary to the first Tuesday in March four years later. California was joined by 11 other states, creating a “Mega Tuesday” in which a third of all conventional delegates were awarded. Also in 2000, a bloc of western states moved their primaries to the Saturday between Mega Tuesday and the South’s Super Tuesday. Front-loaded extravaganzas such as Super Tuesday and Mega Tuesday are the weapons of mass destruction in presidential politics. They kill candidacies by the score. Both Bill Bradley and John McCain conceded their parties’ nominations on March 8, 2000, the day after Mega Tuesday, before the Western Regional Primary and Super Tuesday even took place. Until 1976, New Hampshire held the first primary of the season on the first Tuesday in March, an event that began the campaign in earnest. In 2000, however, the first Tuesday in March marked not the beginning of the campaign, but the end. Even so, we have yet to see the worst of it. For 2004, the Democratic National Committee “has lifted its window restriction on protecting New Hampshire and Iowa,” meaning that states are now free to schedule primaries and caucuses before these two traditional events. It does not seem at all unrealistic to predict that some year (perhaps 2008 or 2012) we will recover from our New Year’s Eve hangovers to find that we have already nominated our presidential candidates!