"Panel Proposes New Calendar for Primaries"

[dajoki]

seriously, what do tou think of this idea? i have read it and re-read it and i'm not sure what to make of it. will it help us, hurt us, or make no difference at all? i would appreciate your opinions. read the entire article to see some of the proposals.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
NYT http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/19/politics/19elect.html??th&emc=th

Panel Proposes New Calendar for Primaries

By DAVID E. ROSENBAUM
Published: September 19, 2005

WASHINGTON, Sept. 18 - A private commission led by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James A. Baker III is proposing new steps to strengthen state election procedures and recommending that Congress require the political parties to hold four regional presidential primaries in election years rather than allowing states to hold primaries whenever they wish.

The bipartisan panel, called the Commission on Federal Election Reform, said it was responding to flaws in the system exposed by the elections of 2000 and 2004.

"We should have an electoral system," the commission declared, "where registering to vote is convenient, voting is efficient and pleasant, voting machines work properly, fraud is deterred and disputes are handled fairly and expeditiously."

Mr. Carter and Mr. Baker, a top official under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush, plan to deliver the report on Monday to President Bush and Congressional leaders. It went to news organizations last week with the understanding that the material would not be published until Monday.

[mcscajun]

1. A Change to the Primary Calendar is A Great Idea!

Other info from the article:

In presidential election years, after the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primaries, the other states should hold regional primaries and caucuses at monthly intervals in March, April, May and June, with the order rotated.

(snip)

In the 2004 campaign, state primaries and caucuses were held earlier than ever, and the nominees were effectively chosen by March.

Everything happens so quickly nowadays in primary campaigns, the commission asserted, that "most Americans have no say in the selection of presidential nominees."

The commission said it was worthwhile for Iowa and New Hampshire to continue to vote first because "they test the candidates by genuine retail, door-to-door campaigning." But four regional contests afterward, the panel said, would "expand participation in the process" and "give voters the chance to closely evaluate the presidential candidates over a three- to four-month period."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/19/politics/19elect.html??th&emc=th

Okay, I gotta fess up here: I live in NJ...which is effectively shut out of the guts of the primary process because we don't vote until June, so that's ONE but not the Only Reason I'm in favor of the change.

[dajoki]

2. i'm still not sure...

it WOULD "expand participation in the process". i could be wrong but it seems like it would make candidates rely more on TV ads, therefore hurting the ones with less money.

[dajoki]

8. still more info...

Voters should be required to present photo ID cards at the polls, and states should provide free cards to voters without driver's licenses. i don't like this.

[mcscajun]

12. I'm not crazy about that part either. n/t

.

[AntiCoup2K4]

3. I'm all for it

Two rural states should not choose our Presidential candidate, and certainly not the same two states every time. The entire process was forced last time.

Mix it up a little. Give the other 48 states their turn.

Now that said, ANYTHING involving that piece of shit James Baker needs to be watched very closely. I'm not sure Jimmy Carter's "good" is enough to overcome that "evil".

[dajoki]

4. that also worries me...

baker is no damn good.

[THUNDER HANDS]

5. oh come on

Just hold a primary in 6 states:

Ohio
Florida
Wisconsin
New Mexico
Missouri
New Hampshire

Pretty much all the other states are going to vote for either a (D) or an (R) no matter who is on the ballot. So we're better off just getting right to the point of who those states prefer.

[dajoki]

6. that's what a primary is for...

to decide who the (D) and (R) will be in general election.

[mcscajun]

13. I'd like to actually Have a voice in who gets onto the general ballot

In New Jersey's case, things are pretty much wrapped up before we ever get to vote...consequently, the candidates are rarely seen here.

[dajoki]

7. what about voter id cards, are you for that?

you must read entire article to see proposals.

Voters should be required to present photo ID cards at the polls, and states should provide free cards to voters without driver's licenses.

[faithnotgreed]

9. first im just so glad this issue of voter reform is discussed at all

it has been basically invisible thus far
except for john conyers of course

but as i stated on another thread - and others have as well - anything that includes james baker has to be suspicious

i respect president carter but baker is bush by extension
therefore it immediately gives a baaaaad feeling

however they do include paper trails so there has to be more to the story
verifiable paper trails are what we have all wanted and been screaming for

but conyers is against the proposal i think because of the required voter id cards
he doesnt believe the govt will pay for them and that states and poor will be forced to pay for them

again i say i am confused
you can take nothing the govt may do at face value
in fact if its this govt then you know its opposite day every day

[dajoki]

10. that's sort of how i feel...

and why i started thread. i'm confused and i do not trust baker. and i am definately against voter id cards, which the pubs want.

[faithnotgreed]

11. well dajoki - i think ive gotten clearer on this

first baker is involved so we know thats bad
second conyers is against this and we know that is another strike

from what i am starting to understand its the voter id cards that is a crucial point
this cabal wants those things so bad its willing to "give" in other areas even to the point of having baker get involved to get this done
and to say we can have paper trails

but we know they have no intention of following through on anything that is truly democratic
and verifiable paper trails will never be something they follow through on

it appears to be a balanced commission but in truth i strongly feel its another piece of propaganda
i am going to guess that if one is an idealist then in principle this could equal voter "reform" and apparently president carter thinks these things will be carried out by this govt
but look who we are talking about

that is all i need to know

on edit: again keep your eye on the voter id cards because i think that is the crux of what they wanted and anything positive that we think is in there will be quickly discarded
like everything else they do

[Sentath]

14. HUH ? Voter ID Cards ?

Where did you come up with that?

Photo ID - driver's license, student id, state id card, military id .. all these are usually qualified as photo ID. I don't see a request for any new cards, just presentation of an existing type of card.

[faithnotgreed]

15. i didnt come up with anything

http://www.conyersblog.us/archives/00000246.htm

conyers points out that there are many people who will be left out of voting if this goes through
and these are the same people who are already given obstacles (of varying degrees) to stay home

whatever the topic i trust john conyers
i cant say i fully understand all of this as im sure the truth of it is hidden like all things related to bush-appointed james baker

but again john conyers knows how these people operate and he has been fighting them like no one else in this government so i stand with him whatever the subject
he knows of what he speaks

on edit: again i stress that its these very people that conyers is concerned about who dont need one more reason to be pushed away from the voting booth
and you know this cabal wants national id cards and will do anything they can to make it happen

maybe this is the first step or maybe they are jumping right to it but calling it another name
regardless it comes from bush so therefore i know its rotten

[dajoki]

16. if you have one...

i can imagine many inner city people not having them, just who the thugs will target. NYT http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/19/politics/19elect.html??th&emc=th

Voters should be required to present photo ID cards at the polls, and states should provide free cards to voters without driver's licenses.

<<snip>>

The recommendations sought to strike a balance between the parties' priorities. Republicans worry about voter fraud and favor photo ID's. Democrats support easier registration and ballot access.

[dajoki]

17. they are basically my thoughts...

confusing, huh?

[faithnotgreed]

18. yes friend it is

im glad to talk this out with you

[dajoki]

20. yeah, me too. thanks n/t

[election_2004]

19. "Four regional presidential primaries" is a terrible idea

I came up with an alternative to the NASS-endorsed plan, and you can go here to read about it:

http://www.flipsidepress.com/issue/getpost.pl?messnumb=1126715988

[dajoki]

21. beats baker's...

no ID cards.

[Tesha]

22. *ANYTHING* that eliminates Iowa and NH helps Dems.

The Iowa caucus and NH primary are ridiculous ways for Democrats
to choose their candidate. Both states are far too white and far
too Right; they deliberately monkey-wrench the Democrats nearly
every time.

This is especially true in NH where a bunch of "Independents"
(read white Republicans who won't admit they're Republicans)
routinely cross-over and cast 50% of the ballots in the Dem-
ocratic primary.

Tesha