States move up primary dates in strategic move
Front-loading aims to outshine Iowa, New Hampshire coverage
By Philip Iglauer
Daily Bruin Contributor
There is at least one good thing about the primary season this
year: it will be shorter.
In what is known as front-loading, a number of states have moved
their primary dates up on the election calendar. For instance, many
Northeastern states have moved their regional primary to March 5 in
order to steal some limelight that the New Hampshire primary and
Iowa caucus traditionally receive.
"The Northeast regional primary could not compete media-wise
with New Hampshire," said Bob Mulholland, campaign adviser for the
California Democratic Party. "Now, they can have a bigger
impact."
In that spirit, California state legislators have moved the
state’s primary to March 26. As in other states, legislators hope
the Golden State will now compete more aggressively for media
attention with its bigger role in the Republican Party nomination
process.
Still, if state legislators are displeased with California’s
impact on the GOP nomination, they may change the state’s primary
date again.
"This is a one time only thing," Mulholland said. "They may
change it back in 2000."
As of yet, Clinton does not face a challenger within his party.
So, for the foreseeable future, the Democratic nomination is a done
deal.
Additionally, shifting electoral calendars is also altering the
character of the political landscape. Compared with 1992, twice as
many states will have their primaries by the middle of March than
afterwards. More than 23 states will have chosen 1,100 delegates by
mid-March, much more than the 996 needed to win the GOP nomination.
In 1992 by this time, only 14 states with 631 delegates had cast
their ballots.
The phenomena of intense primary activity, more than 23 in
February and March, and a shorter primary overall is known as
"front-loading." It may have unique effects. Now, the candidate
with a well-financed and long-established campaign organization has
an even greater advantage than in the past.
"(Front-loading) makes it difficult for someone who is not well
known," said Todd Harris, the communications director for the
California Republican Party.
Front-loading will make Super Tuesday primaries devastating in
the GOP contest, where several states merge their primaries into
one giant election. Because the race is so fast, there is little
time for a candidate to build support in a state, or recover from
previous defeats.
With many state primaries bunched up at the beginning, a
candidate must make early impressive gains and build momentum
quickly to be successful. In the past, a candidate would pace
himself for a long, arduous race, instead of focusing on early
victories so heavily.
"Front-loading everything favors the candidate with a lot of
money in the beginning," said Mike Feinstein, Los Angeles County
organizer of the Green Party.
This will likely favor Sen. Bob Dole (R-Kansas). He has won the
endorsement and active support of most GOP governors, so he will
likely have their respective state organizations at his
disposal.
"It would typically be the case that GOP grass-roots
organizations will go behind their governors," said Harris, who is
also a UCLA political science alumnus.
Dole has won the support of California Gov. Pete Wilson as well
as governors of the crucial early primary states.
For instance, Dole has secured the support of Gov. Steve Merrill
(R-N.H.). Merrill’s endorsement may be a huge boost to the Dole
campaign in the key primary state, because Merrill maintains
approval ratings of more than 60 percent, and won a crushing
re-election victory in 1994 – 70 percent of the vote.
With the support of a governor as popular as Merrill, Dole has a
significant advantage over the other GOP contenders. Money and the
backing of established state organizations have made endorsements
from governors like Merrill more vital.
Despite governors’ endorsements going to Dole, the other
nomination hopefuls tread on undaunted. Their campaign strategists
are creating unique theories about how to best exploit the quirks
of the new primary calendar.
Patrick Buchanan and Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Texas) are fighting it
out in Louisiana, because it not only is the first caucus, but has
as many delegates as Iowa and New Hampshire put together. Also,
Dole is not campaigning in Louisiana, giving them more visibility
in the state.
South Carolina may now be as important as Iowa and New Hampshire
– it is the key to winning the South because it is the first
Southern state primary. Also, it falls within 10 days of several
other Southern states which will select 371 GOP delegates. The
momentum from South Carolina will likely carry the candidate
through the South.
Therefore, it is possible that if a candidate carries all three
key states – Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina – he will have
won enough delegates to effectively end the primaries before April,
perhaps even before California’s March 26 primary.
So far, Dole has made significant headway in securing a victory
in South Carolina. Dole has the support of the state’s
establishment’s key leaders – Republican Gov. David Beasley, his
two-term predecessor Carroll Cambell and the nearly century-old
Republican Sen. Strom Thurmond.
If Dole fares poorly in Iowa and New Hampshire, then South
Carolina would become yet more pivotal, because of the role the
state has played in previous seriously contested struggles for the
GOP nomination.
In 1980, George Bush surprised Ronald Reagan and former Gov.
John Connally, the two front runners, by winning the Iowa caucus.
Reagan regained his momentum by winning the New Hampshire primary.
Reagan then won a landslide victory in South Carolina, knocking
Connally from the race, and securing a lead over Bush that he never
surrendered.
In 1988, the state assured Bush’s triumph over Dole. In that
race Dole took Iowa, but Bush came back by winning New Hampshire.
South Carolina allowed Bush a victory over Dole and televangelist
Pat Robertson, setting him up for victory on Super Tuesday.
The heightened importance of the early primaries and caucuses
and the overall shorter season may make California superfluous.
"It is probably a mistake for a state to change its primary date
just for one election," said John Petrocik, a UCLA political
science professor.
If the state’s primary does not become more important in the
nomination process, California state legislators will probably be
disappointed.
"It is smarter to just pick a date and leave it there," Petrocik
said. "In some elections you will be significant and in others you
will not."Comments to webmaster@db.asucla.ucla.edu