In Our View: Reasonable Reform

More than half a century after Perry Como seductively crooned “Dream along with me …” on black-and-white TV screens, Sam Reed is making the same invitation to voters in presidential primaries. Unlike Como’s serenade, Reed’s is not a solo. The chorus includes our Republican secretary of state and his cohorts in the National Association of Secretaries of State.

They’re all dreaming about a national system of presidential primaries that embraces all voters in a timely and efficient manner. The current system — with states rushing to reschedule presidential primaries to earlier dates so as to become more influential — is dysfunctional, to put it mildly. The Olympian newspaper pointed out in a recent editorial that, in 2008, 37 states and the District of Columbia had presidential primaries by the end of February. “States were so eager to be at the front — they pushed the process so far forward — that there were campaign commercials running on television at Thanksgiving and Christmas in 2007, a full year ahead of the presidential election,” the editorial justifiably complained.

Two years ago, our state (which actually had canceled the 2004 presidential primary because it wouldn’t have mattered) tried to keep pace by moving the primary a few months earlier, to Feb. 19. But if the national stampede to earlier primaries continues, even Feb. 19 could be too late in 2012.

Reed and other secretaries of state have devised a brilliant solution, one which we heartily endorsed a year ago. And as 2012 looms more imminent by the day, it’s time to accelerate the momentum toward reform. Here’s how the new system would work:

States would be divided into four regional primary dates. Our West region would include 13 states and Guam. The schedule would rotate so that, every four elections, each region would have the advantage of voting first — and during that same period will also have voted second, third and fourth. All primaries would be scheduled closer to the presidential election, which would eliminate the worst flaw in the current free-for-all system: premature decision-making. Imagine how many crucial political issues and breaking news events could arise and how many consequential scandals could be ferreted out between a January primary and a November election.

If the outrageous first-to-matter race continues, and if some kind of reform is not instituted, we can envision presidential primaries conducted more than a year before presidential elections. No sane voter would want that, but when state party officials are beguiled by the opportunity to matter more, sanity often is abandoned.

The Olympian quoted Reed: “By design, the (reform) plan encourages candidates to become well-versed on issues facing all regions of the U.S., not just those taking priority in early primary states.” Sounds great, eh? There’s more: “Candidates, voters and political party members are increasingly frustrated and confused by our seemingly arbitrary and chaotic process. It is time to establish a process that gives every state and its voters a reasonable opportunity to play a role” in determining the next president.

Sadly, though, we present this entire issue in the context of a song about dreams. No matter how much wisdom is encased in the secretaries’ plan, they face a formidable enemy in political party officials who desperately want to protect the primary system we have, no matter how defective it has become. To them, reform represents a monkey wrench thrown into the fragile status quo. This is not the first time we’ve seen political party leaders valuing themselves more than voters.

We don’t know if Reed sings tenor or bass, but for now, he seems fixed on a dreamy melody, just like Como back in the ’50s.