Presidential primary elections CANCELLED in my state, how about yours?

[angka]

I am forced to greet all this hand-wringing about candidate-bashing threads with a sly grin. And why?

Because I'm not gonna get to pick the nominee.

It's not a question of my primary coming late in the year and therefore becoming meaningless-another undemocratic manipulation of the system. Nope, my vote won't count at all because I won't get to vote.

Elections cancelled? What is this, Liberia? Northern Ireland?

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0809-04.htm

Because of a combination of tight budgets and partisan political maneuvering, at least three states, and probably more, will not hold presidential primaries next year. Legislators in recent months have canceled their states' primaries in Colorado, Kansas and Utah. Budget crunches were a big factor in all three states.

Colorado started the trend. On March 5, Republican Gov. Bill Owens signed a bill eliminating the 2004 primary, for a one-time savings of $2.2 million. The move was part of a major budget-cutting package that slashed $800 million from Colorado's 2002-2003 budget.

Besides fiscal austerity, an argument many lawmakers make in favor of abolishing primaries is the "front-loaded" primary schedule. That is, in the race to make their influence felt in the nominating process, more and more states have moved their primaries to the front of the line. A delegate selection process that once ran from February to June is now effectively over in early March. So if your state's primary isn't early, it's irrelevant.

I've known about this since March, of course; but as primary season gets better and people start arguing this critical Democratic selection out, I'm getting more and more bitter. Disenfranchisement with a smiley face. Oh, sorry, we're out of money. No democracy for you. But it doesn't matter because everybody knows Bush is a shoo-in anyway

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

1. Bush's plan: Bankrupt the states so they cancel elections

Simplistic, but genius in it's own way. I think I'm being sarcastic, but with Bush you never know.

[otohara]

2. Cancel Unless GOP Is At Stake

I bet the funds re-appear in 2008, at least in CO. Where get this....Owens name is often thrown out as a possible "candidate for president" - hahahahahahahaha - better stay married Bill

[Starpass]

3. So who will pick their delegates to the convention??

Will this be done by the cacuses (sp.?)....

[im4edwards]

5. yes

so it looks like you might have to get off the couch and get yourself personally involved with your very own Democratic Party. And as you have had six months to get around to it I'm sure it will be no problem.

The up side is that this eliminates the chance of republican moles subverting the process.

[Hippo_Tron]

9. Yeah but Republican moles are stupid

They're all gonna vote Sharpton who doesn't have a chance in hell in winning the pimary anyway.

[angka]

13. 'get off my couch'

that's funny. if you knew me you'd know why.

[PaDUer]

4. Am not surprised..

this has been brewing for awhile..it's all part of the plan..Don't forget the ship's going down, and we're being held hostage while they've been looting the entire nation and the world in the open. Desperate people do desperate things??

[shockingelk]

6. I read Oregon voters are impertinant as well.

[sandnsea]

20. We're voting

last I checked. We by god better be. Our primary isn't such a big deal because it's not until May. Everything is usually decided by then. The last time we were important was 1968, when Bobby Kennedy came, and the people sadly didn't choose him. I was a kid in CA at the time.

[Donna Zen]

7. Can a state use caucuses

if they've never had them? We've always had them, so no big diff up here. But who decides and organizes them if you have never run them before? Anyway, I run the one in my town and intend to put some extra energy into it in '04.

I'm planning to have an open house about two weeks prior to the actual caucus with candidate literature to make sure the Dems in town turn out for the big day.

[angka]

10. yes, and i'll be there.

but cancelling the primaries (with very very little press) will leave many good democrats out in the cold. i grew up in california and have always looked at caucuses as exclusionary.

this is huge and very bad...

[dflprincess]

17. I imagine it will be up to the party organizations in each state

to decide how to pick their delegates. At least on the Democratic side, whatever plan the Dems come up with will have to be approved by the DNC. At least in Minnesota that is the case though there isn't much change from caucus to caucus. The DNC always finds something they don't like and we either have to change it or get a waiver.

The caucus date here is set by state law (though the party may choose to deviate from that date). The party then leaves it up to every state senate district or county unit to arrange (and pay) for their own caucuses.

[angka]

18. never fear...

the colorado democrats have a DNC-approved delegate selection process in place. but i hate the idea of this plan B stuff. that's not democracy.

[Wwagsthedog]

8. Lest we forget

JFK was the first President to benefit from "primary" election victories. Now they are so commonplace we regard them as privileges. Remember, primaries are political party functions. We must be sure that Democrats are reminded that we expect that our candidates to be selected by the people and not a caucus of political cronies. The following is a story from the 2000 Convention.

http://usembassy.state.gov/islamabad/wwwh00081502.html

Los Angeles -- It was the first-ever national political convention to take place in the "city of angels." (Los Angeles means "angels" in Spanish.) The year was 1960. Democrats gathered and selected John F. Kennedy as their nominee for president. Now, 40 years later, they are holding their second convention in this sprawling city to nominate Al Gore as their standard bearer in the 2000 election.

Forty years is not long in the history of a political party or in the life of a nation, but it is hard to overstate how different the political climate was four decades ago and how dissimilar the 1960 convention was from the convention under way this year. In 1960, the Cold War dominated the political landscape. The civil rights revolution and the women's movement that would transform the Democratic Party had not yet fully materialized.

As far as the conventions are concerned, the key difference between 1960 and 2000 is the number of state primaries in which the voters, rather than local party leaders, select the nominee by voting for convention delegates. In 1960, there were few primaries. Consequently, conventions were still contested, contentious events because no candidate could win a sufficient number of delegates "pledged" to him in the primaries to prevail at the convention. The outcome was not known for certain until the final roll call of the states.

More on link.

[JohnKleeb]

11. sick

[Yupster]

12. I thought the parties paid for the primaries?

I didn't think thaqt was a state expense?

[Kazak]

14. Cheeses, I hadn't even heard about that...that sucks!

Thats a major problem. *sighs* ...shouldn't even be an option...

[Kazak]

16. The Democratic Process is now on sale...

for 2.2 mil. Takers?

[Yupster]

19. Can't the party just pay for it?

I thought the parties paid for it anyway. They should IMO.

[stickdog]

15. WHAT THE FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK!!!!!!

??????????????????????

The proverbial fix is in.

Dems were within striking distance in Colorado in 2000.

[nolabels]

21. We should make them cancel all elections, while we errect a new..........

Government for WE THE PEOPLE

[LWolf]

22. Do all 3 states have republican governors?

It seems like there could/should be some sort of action against such a blatant theft of democracy.

What are your state and local dem chapters doing?

[Timefortruth]

23. It is time to get involved!

Become active in civic and party groups!

[PATRICK]

24. Another Game Plan?

Are they trying to chop off a block of delgates into "broker ready" status while the Dem candidates(with judicious touchscreen shaving) cannot get enough delegates for a winner.

Brokered convention and the kind of sudden scandal or distraction blitz by the GOP right when the guys are tousling among themselves for the nomination to spoil everything.

Is anyone awake at the DNC? It's time to hire some true paranoiacs who might understand what is happening.

[MuseRider]

25. I am going to

go check on this. I looked up the information for Kansas last week. We had legislation to cancel the primaries but the info I found said that our Democratic Governor vetoed it. I was at a party with some state party people and one of them told me we were not going to have a primary so now I don't know. I will find out the info later today.

[angka]

27. confirmation is doubleplusgood.

let us know...

[DocSavage]

26. benefit to canidates

This is somewhat of a benefit to the canidates. They will be able to spend more money in the states that they may do very well in. More money to spend on Super Tuesday. I live in Kansas, do you know the number of democratic voters in this state? Not a lot.

Just a thought on this also, it may not be good to play this real hard, what happened to the primary vote for Senate in NJ last time.