States rethink primaries amid rising costs

[WhiteTara]

Source: Herald and Review

PHOENIX — Arizona officials are getting tired of footing the $6 million bill for the state's presidential primary and want to foist the cost onto the political parties as states around the country weigh the cost of the contests.

Colorado may go the other direction, bringing back state-run primaries. Utah lawmakers voted to scrap primaries in favor of caucuses in the two most recent presidential election cycles.

States have come up with various ways to handle the contests every four years, and cost is a factor.

About a third hold primaries for governor, Congress and other races at the same time as their White House primaries to save money on poll workers, locations and ballots, said Wendy Underhill, elections program director with the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Read more: http://herald-review.com/ap/state-rethink-primaries-amid-rising-costs/article_2e143a23-268a-56ae-b3f6-0a1f93abc9b6.html

[cactusfractal]

1. Easy fix: Instant Runoff Voting! n/t

[Renew Deal]

7. How does that fix people showing up to vote?

[KamaAina]

2. Ugh. Caucuses are undemocratic.

Generally speaking, people who work evenings are excluded (this is why Nevada Dems, but not repukes, held theirs on a Saturday morning).

[Autumn]

3. I would like to see the caucus done away with. A mail in ballot is so much easier and inclusive.

The people who have the most to gain in using their vote are most often unable to spend the time needed to caucus.

[dogman]

4. It makes sense to drop Primaries.

If the Parties make their own rules and try to pick the candidate for the people, why should taxpayers foot the bill? We are told they are private clubs that can make their own rules.

[cloudythescribbler]

5. isn't dropping primaries dumping the MOST democratic aspect of the system?

I agree that the two-party duopoly needs to be opened up wider. But dropping primaries is throwing out the baby and maybe and maybe not the bathwater (probably not). A series of reforms should be urged by Sanders' supporters at the Convention, whether he gets the nomination or not, in the whole political process, within the party and in formats like primaries.

Basically I don't see how caucuses, which require people to take a lot of time out (filtering out nonrandomly who can participate) as opposed to an open vote. A number of specifics: NO closed primaries or caucuses, mail-in ballots on request, easier registration and no voter ID or other intentionally restrictive type laws, adequate funding for precincts not only in wealthy suburbs but in urban areas, perhaps a checkoff on state income taxes to go towards the financing of elections in EVERY state, and no doubt a host of other reforms to make the process more transparent and more fair.

Within the Party, there needs to be a more democratic system for determining how many debates there are, a demand for more progressive-friendly (or at least a mixed balance) of leadership, dumping Debbie Wasserman Schultz and her like from their positions of enormous clout, and much more (I am not a wonk of this stuff, but progressives who are could probably propose more)

The notion in general is that elections are a public interest, and progressives in the Democratic Party should insist that both within the party, and in its platform, that the 'private club' approach be ditched. That is the only real way out. (On at least some of these issues, like abolishing dual primaries, the Rainbow Coalition made them a central concern back in the 80s)

[dogman]

6. It's not just the Dem Party.

The GOP is frantically trying to rearrange the deck chairs. Since the Parties want to provide the candidate of their choice, why not let them just present that for the General? They could conduct their search in any manner they choose, it would be up to the electorate to confirm that choice. Actually the Parties could go on-line, mail, or phone if they want. My personal preference would be for one prescribed election day that would be a National holiday in which only critical services were allowed open and provisions made for those critical workers to vote. It would be a great day to dedicate to our Country, a Democracy Day.

[Brother_Love]

8. Mail in ballot ...in all states.

[WhiteTara]

10. It is the easiest and results in the most votes. nt

[the_sly_pig]

9. Properly tax the wealthy and corporations.

Problem solved. The issue is not about money.

[mpcamb]

15. Maybe there's just not quite enough money in politcs...

*sarcasm thing*

[stopbush]

11. If the states want to turn over the primary expenses to the political parties,

then they (the States) should have no say in when the primaries take place nor in what kind of primary may take place. At present, the states determine the date of the primary, whether there's a caucus or a primary, and whether that primary is open or closed.

The political parties are choosing nominees from their party to run for president in the general. I believe that given the choice, the two major parties would go to closed primaries, which is the only real way to go if your goal is to have members of the party pick the party candidates. If an Independent candidate wants to run, they should run as an Independent candidate and hold primaries to determine an Independent nominee.

[LiberalFighter]

12. You are so right!

An easy solution would be for all the states have their regular primary elections held the same date.

Four states apparently hold their regular primaries in September, 16 states in August, 19 states in June. Some states hold multiple primaries during non-presidential election years.

[winstars]

13. OMG! Democracy actually cost money? $15 per person to vote maybe? WTF?

Save money by less voting, yeah, thats the ticket...

[NobodyHere]

14. The public shouldn't have to pay a cent for a political party's primary