Pennsylvania - House amends bill to move presidential primary earlier

[CurtisLow]

House amends bill to move presidential primary earlier
7/7/2007, 5:31 p.m. EDT
The Associated Press

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — Pennsylvania voters would shed their long-standing irrelevancy in the presidential primary process under an amended bill that would move up presidential primary elections in the commonwealth.

The bill would change the date of such primaries to the second Tuesday in February, or Feb. 12 next year. It would reserve the third Tuesday in May, or May 20 next year, for referendums in school districts in which tax increases that exceed inflation must be submitted for voter approval.

Amendments added on the House floor Saturday would require the state to reimburse counties for the cost of those school-district referendums and would end the public posting of absentee voter lists, making them available upon request to people who provide identification.

In years without a presidential election, there would only be one spring primary.

The bill now awaits a final vote in the House.

A number of states have moved next year's presidential primary earlier in the year in an attempt to have greater influence over selection of the parties' candidates.

Critics, however, say an earlier primary in Pennsylvania could pose logistical problems for elections officials and campaign workers, and they say poor weather could drive turnout lower.

[Noodles]

Dr. Paul was born in PA, right?

[Dave]

Many states are continuing to do this, and it sets off a chain reaction back through the other states as the dominoes continue to fall.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the Iowa Caucuses move from January 14 back into December.

The whole caucus/primary calendar shifts forward, leaving us an outrageously long general election campaign after the nominations are decided.

[CurtisLow]

Dr. Paul was born in PA, right?


Yes, Pittsburgh, Pa

[hells_unicorn]

This is completely ridiculous and I plan on shouting down every halfwit that had anything to do with this. Keep the damn primaries where they are and let the damn candidates compete, damnit! (pardon my french)

[kylejack]

We do not want big states like this early in the process. It will be hard for us to get momentum if Iowa and New Hampshire get marginalized.

[rpf2008]

If this is what the people of Pennsylvania want I'm all for it.

Since Mr. Paul is such an outstanding candidate I don't believe issues like this are going to hurt him.

[kylejack]

If this is what the people of Pennsylvania want I'm all for it.

Since Mr. Paul is such an outstanding candidate I don't believe issues like this are going to hurt him.

Every day I become more convinced that you're a troll.

This would be devastating. We need the smaller states early in the process because it is easier for a maverick candidate like Ron Paul to build momentum there.

[rich34]

But this type of scenario does hurt from a financial point of view. I mean lets face it, the more states you have wanting to have their primary sooner the more money you'll need to spend in each of those states if you're wanting to get elected. Where as if it's a drawn out process like it has been you don't necessarily need that money asap. The type of layout benefits the candidates with the most money because they're able to advertise in each of the states where as a guy like Ron will have to pick and choose his battles if he don't have the money to combat the coporate candidates.

[richard1984]

What are the reasons for moving the primaries?

Do they not have anything more important to do?

Lord, have mercy....

[MozoVote]

The USA has functioned just fine with a lengthy nomination process for over a hundred years. Bunching up all the states at once just favors the most established, money raising candidates.

I think the current calendar is already pretty bad. States should work out something to rotate their positions so that no one state is stuck at the end of the sequence.

[Exponent]

What are the reasons for moving the primaries?

Do they not have anything more important to do?

Lord, have mercy....
Due to people's silly tendency to vote according to who they think will win (they want to be on the winning bandwagon), rather than according to who they think is best for the job, people in states with late primaries feel that their votes hardly count, since the winner is "already decided" by the earlier states.

If only people didn't have this bandwagon mentality, then this wouldn't be a problem. However, since this is the case, having most of the primaries bunched up does remove some of the influence away from a select few states. Unfortunately, the influence doesn't get distributed evenly amongst the states, as is the supposed goal. Rather the influence remains unevenly distributed; only this time it isn't an uneven distrubution among states, but, as has been stated, an uneven distribution based on money.

This attempt to move the primaries forward in order to remain relevant is merely an attempt to treat a symptom, an activity that so often fails to accomplish what it sets out to achieve. To treat the disease, we need people to vote more intelligently.

[Bradley in DC]

NH officials have threatened to vote on Halloween if that's what they need to do to remain the first primary! RNC by-laws require that this process be finalized by September 1st of this year and any states holding primaries/caucuses too early would not have their delegates seated at the convention.

[Noodles]

Do you really blame other states for lashing out against the stronghold that Iowa and New Hampshire have traditionally enjoyed in the presidential primaries? While these two great states certainly are within their rights to hold their primaries early, they do receive the lions' share of publicity, money, and campaign visits, not to mention the more important fact that they hold sway over who continues in the race and who is relegated to also-ran status. Other states have, I say rightly, decided that the current setup is unfair to the people not fortunate enough to reside in Iowa or New Hampshire.

The idea of a rotating schedule for the primary calendar is not without merit; however, IA and NH will not agree. As an earlier poster noted, NH has promised to move their primary up to 10/31 if necessary to maintain their position. So, if any of the other 48 states pursue this matter further, only Congress will be able to sort it out, and that only after the Supreme Court rules that the court system has no authority on the matter.

Eventually, I suspect we will have all 50 states voting on the same day. I actually like this idea, because it somewhat diminishes the effect of the MSM, allows voters from each state to vote their conscience, rather than for the guy who won the first few primaries, and would probably reduce the amount of money required to run a campaign.

I do realize that I'm probably wrong on at least half of these points, so flame away, but please be gentle. :D

[austin356]

It really is time for the Delaware Plan

[BigSteve]

I am from Pennsylvania and I think Ron Paul will win the primary here. I am spreading the word in the Keystone State!

[Noodles]

Welcome BigSteve. Glad to have you on board.

[CurtisLow]

I am from Pennsylvania and I think Ron Paul will win the primary here. I am spreading the word in the Keystone State!


Welcome to the forums BigSteve! If possible get into a meetup group. there all over Pa.


http://www.meetup.com/cities/

[Birdlady]

Cheers! More people from PA. :)

[RonPaulCult]

I am from the next town over from where Ron Paul went to high school here in Pittsburgh, PA. I am sick of people in Iowa and New Hampshire picking the two people the rest of the country get to pick from come November.

And why am I sick of it? Because they always pick shitty people. If they were better at picking then so be it but they SUCK.


It seems to me especially in Iowa that votes are all but bought by the campaigns with the most money.

I understand the argument about needing as much time as possible to get the word out about smaller candidates. But if the primary date stays the same in PA it won't matter anyway because the results won't matter. People are sheep and once one guy wins in the first few states people get on board with that person in the rest of them.

[BigSteve]

Welcome to the forums BigSteve! If possible get into a meetup group. there all over Pa.


http://www.meetup.com/cities/

I joined the Luzerne County Meet-up group but I haven't been able to make the meetings because of conflicting schedules. I have been going to anti-illegal immigration rallies here in PA wearing my "Ron Paul for President" t-shirt. Ron Paul is one of the very few candidates that truly want to stop illegal immigration. If Tancredo and Hunter drop out,he will be the ONLY one .

[Avalon]

I actually like this idea, because it somewhat diminishes the effect of the MSM, allows voters from each state to vote their conscience, rather than for the guy who won the first few primaries, and would probably reduce the amount of money required to run a campaign.

Only the leading candidates get considerable MSM exposure, which traditionally is the greatest determining factor (along with expectation, which they have inherently and the MSM increases). Only the leading candidates can afford national TV ads (especially primetime) which would be the second greatest determining factor in such a primary system. Only the leading candidates would have staff/organizers in all the metro areas, which can take vague positions taken by their candidate (pushed by their marketing department), concentrate/alter them to what sells to the locals, and push it out.

Having small states first allows the other candidates to focus all their efforts there and if they do well they'll get MSM exposure and a big increase in expectation. Even people without "mainstream" opinions like Pat Buchanon have a small shot at winning as long as they can convert NH and IA residents. They have no shot otherwise.

I hope we're seeing this change with the internet...this will be the great experiment. I agree that NH and IA shouldn't always be first (I think they should be ordered increasinly in terms of delegates, rotated within their group, and spaced more in the beginning than at the end...and certainly no super Tuesday)

[Birdlady]

I am from the next town over from where Ron Paul went to high school here in Pittsburgh, PA. I am sick of people in Iowa and New Hampshire picking the two people the rest of the country get to pick from come November.

And why am I sick of it? Because they always pick shitty people. If they were better at picking then so be it but they SUCK.


It seems to me especially in Iowa that votes are all but bought by the campaigns with the most money.

I understand the argument about needing as much time as possible to get the word out about smaller candidates. But if the primary date stays the same in PA it won't matter anyway because the results won't matter. People are sheep and once one guy wins in the first few states people get on board with that person in the rest of them.


Yeah I definitely understand what you are saying about how the primary doesn't really matter here because it is so late. Unfortunately Ron Paul has a LONG WAY to go in this state. If they bump it up and make it a big deal we just won't have the votes ready. People are definitely open to talking, but we have a lot of people who still have BUSH CHENEY 04 bumper stickers AND Sportsman for Santorum bumper stickers. That kind of shows you the mind set here and it's not in our favor.

If you are interested in joining a Meetup look at the links in my signature. Perhaps you are already in my meetup. haha :p

[CurtisLow]

I joined the Luzerne County Meet-up group but I haven't been able to make the meetings because of conflicting schedules. I have been going to anti-illegal immigration rallies here in PA wearing my "Ron Paul for President" t-shirt. Ron Paul is one of the very few candidates that truly want to stop illegal immigration. If Tancredo and Hunter drop out,he will be the ONLY one .

Great to hear it! Sounds like your busy on all fronts. Good job!

[GreyBlood]

Having NH and IA picking first next year might be an advantage. RP is probably going to win NH so then he will be launched in the limelight whether the MFKAM (Media Formally Known As Mainstream) likes it or not. if all 50 states held it on the same day and Ron wins a few states then alot of people with be like "Dang, if i knew he could actually win, I would of voted for him instead!"

[RonPaulCult]

Yeah I definitely understand what you are saying about how the primary doesn't really matter here because it is so late. Unfortunately Ron Paul has a LONG WAY to go in this state. If they bump it up and make it a big deal we just won't have the votes ready. People are definitely open to talking, but we have a lot of people who still have BUSH CHENEY 04 bumper stickers AND Sportsman for Santorum bumper stickers. That kind of shows you the mind set here and it's not in our favor.

If you are interested in joining a Meetup look at the links in my signature. Perhaps you are already in my meetup. haha :p

Yep I am :)