A proposal for a less 'stupid' system of regional primaries

A few weeks after the 2000 presidential election, when Al Gore won the popular vote but George Bush won the Electoral College vote with a push from the Supreme Court, a woman approached me at a reception in Stockholm, Sweden, where I was serving as the embassy's press spokesman.

"You have a stupid electoral system," she said, quite perturbed.

Of course, the majority of Swedes skew left, so favored Gore, but I had to laugh (a little) because this was coming from a country where a constitutional reform in 1970 created a unicameral parliament of 350 members. In 1973, the elections left the parliament (Riksdag) evenly divided between left and right 175-175. Issues were decided over the next year by drawing lots in what became known as the "Lottery Riksdag." In 1974 the number of parliamentarians was reduced to 349.

However, the point is that America is seen all over the world as a champion of democracy. In countries where people have no voice, the idea of being able to choose your leaders freely and fairly is a dream of a better life. Think of the women in Afghanistan and Iraq holding up their stained fingers after having voted for the first time.

So, the way we run our elections matter and not just to us. If the process is not seen as fair because of election tampering, as we recently saw in a congressional race in North Carolina, or through voter suppression measures or even the perception that the votes were not counted fairly, that has ramifications far beyond our borders.

The not-ready-for-prime-time technology that fouled the Iowa caucuses is something that can be fixed, but the perception that small states deemed by some to be unrepresentative of the country at large have undue influence also gnaws at the legitimacy of the process.

So, I have a modest proposal.

Six regional primaries (no caucuses) spread over three or four months starting in early February. The regions would rotate so that the same region would not go first every time. It is a drain on candidate resources when they have to jet among Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada. When the states are geographically bunched, candidates can spend more time with voters and less time on planes (though the vast West presents an undeniable challenge).

Here are my proposed groups: (1) Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey; (2) Delaware, Maryland, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida; (3) Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa; (4) Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, Texas, Oklahoma; (5) Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico; (6) Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, California, Alaska, and Hawaii.

Regional primaries would be held in these groups with a two- or three-week gap in between. Again, we would have only primaries and not caucuses, in order to maximize turnout. Caucuses by their nature reduce turnout, especially now that states are perfecting online voting. We have already seen a lot of hand-wringing that turnout in Iowa was lower than expected or hoped for.

Many will point out the flaws in this system and there is a very strong case to be made for the kind of retail politics we see in Iowa and New Hampshire where voters get to be up close and personal with the candidates, but too many people are opining that Iowa's self-anointed status is undeserved.

As Churchill observed, democracy is the worst system, except for all the others - it is by its very nature a messy process.

Churchill also observed that the greatest argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter, which suggests he found some voters, shall we say, uninformed.

This is a two-way street. The candidates have their role to play but the voters' robust participation is what really can confirm that America is a true beacon of democracy.

Keith Peterson, of Lake Barrington, served 29 years as a press and cultural officer for the United States Information Agency and Department of State. He was chief editorial writer of the Daily Herald 1984-86.