The presidential primaries have dragged on, but it’s hard to figure how all this is a bad thing. It’s been years since anyone cared who won such votes in places like Oregon or South Dakota. The more involved, the better.
And anything is better than leaving party nominations up to a pair of unrepresentative states that nonetheless have a huge say in who gets the final nod. New Hampshire and Iowa have few people, little diversity and no cities. They have no business setting the primary agenda.
That part of the quadrennial schedule is long past, but it’s worth thinking about the next time. Many observers consider it a good thing to have a relatively small, low-population bellwether get things going — it gives voters a chance to get to know the candidates in somewhat intimate settings for months before the vote.
Those are valid points; there should be a starting spot where voters can find out all they can about their choices. But it shouldn’t be Iowa or New Hampshire.
It should be Connecticut.
It makes too much sense to ever happen, but this state is the best suited in the nation for the role.
- It’s small. The third-smallest, in fact, meaning it’s easy to get across in half a day or less. Candidates could hit every corner twice over and give all 3 million or so of us a chance to hear them out.
- It’s (somewhat) representative. State demographics rank much closer to national averages than either Iowa or New Hampshire. Using 2006 numbers, look at the states’ white, black and Hispanic populations in comparison:
US CT IO NH
%w 80.1 84.6 94.6 95.8
%b 12.8 10.2 2.5 1.1
%H 14.8 11.2 3.8 2.3
Connecticut isn’t the most diverse place on the planet, but we’ve got those two beat. - A lot of people live here. Our population isn’t huge by national standards, but we’re No. 4 in density. Since most people in this country live in cities or suburbs, Connecticut is representative of most people’s situations.
- We also have small towns. Litchfield County and, especially, the eastern half of the state are still mostly rural, and there are working farms dotting the countryside. Like the rest of the country, farming isn’t what it once was, but we still have them.
- Income disparity — the nation has it; we’ve got it more. Rich people are legion in towns closest to New York, but the cities are bastions of poverty. Closing this gap should be among presidential candidates’ top priorities.
- Finally, we have cities. Not booming metropolises, certainly, but New Haven, Hartford, Stamford and, of course, Bridgeport are big enough, and with enough problems, to finally get urban issues part of the national discussion. Instead of spending months on ethanol, which everyone knows is a sham, candidates could compare policies on smart growth, congestion, mass transit, urban poverty, etc. These are issues that affect vastly more Americans than the typical farmers’ problems that dominate Iowa.
As it is now, cities are basically absent from the national political debate. Even though most Americans live in or close to one, the problems of urban life don’t make the agenda. Maybe changing the nominating process could fix that.
There’s no chance our state will topple the traditional starter states, and, it’s true, Rhode Island or Delaware would work about as well. But something ought to change. Though we didn’t see it this year, with Iowa and New Hampshire producing different results for both parties, too often those states set the table for everyone else.
Imagine candidates swinging through the Naugatuck Valley towns, stumping in Bridgeport, stopping off at Jones Family Farms. The site of closed factories in the background would dominate the nightly news for months.
It beats an Iowa cornfield.
Hugh S. Bailey is assistant editorial page editor of the Connecticut Post. You can reach him at 203-330-6233 or by e-mail at hbailey@ctpost.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment