Los Angeles Times

Democrats struggle to rework primaries

Party has OKd Biden’s plan to change order states vote, but some of them are balking.

- By Will Weissert Weissert writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — New Hampshire is in open rebellion. Georgia is all but out.

South Carolina and Nevada are on board but face stiff Republican pushback. Michigan’s compliance may mean a shorter legislativ­e session in a state where Democrats control both chambers and the governor’s mansion.

Then there’s Iowa, still hoping to go first without breaking party rules.

Months after the Democratic Party approved President Biden’s plan to overhaul primaries to better ref lect a diverse voter base, implementi­ng the revamped order has proved anything but simple. Party officials expect the process to continue through the end of the year as the 2024 presidenti­al race heats up.

“Despite the fact that it looked like relatively smooth sailing for the president when he proposed it ... the kind of backlash you’re hearing, the reactions, are exactly what we would have expected,” said David Redlawsk, political science chair at the University of Delaware and co-author of “Why Iowa? How Caucuses and Sequential Elections Improve the Presidenti­al Nominating Process.”

The Democratic National Committee says it is not too concerned by the uncertaint­y, in part because

Biden faces only minor primary challenger­s: self-help author Marianne Williamson and anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Biden’s political advisors say he doesn’t plan to campaign extensivel­y until the general election. But the primary calendar drama could make it harder for Democrats to project unity before 2024 — and might spell trouble for 2028, when the party promises to revisit it.

Jim Roosevelt, co-chair of the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee, said the objections from Iowa and New Hampshire weren’t surprising since they’re losing their leadoff spots. He said the committee is “definitely able to work around” the protests of Republican­s in places adjusting to new rules or new slots on the calendar.

“I think having a sitting president is the most likely time to make a fundamenta­l change to make the process more representa­tive,” said Roosevelt. He noted the party last enforced a new calendar order before the competitiv­e 2008 primary.

It may get that chance again soon, with no Democratic incumbent to run during a potential reordering for 2028. Another long, contentiou­s calendar process then may mean real electoral consequenc­es, and could make it hard for the party’s presidenti­al hopefuls to know where to campaign and advertise.

But the prospect of another drawn-out fight probably won’t deter the party, Roosevelt said.

The DNC has no plans to alter the 2024 lineup approved in February that strips Iowa of the leadoff spot its caucuses have held since 1972, replacing it with South Carolina’s primary on Feb. 3. New Hampshire and Nevada, which is scrapping caucuses for a primary, were to share the second slot, voting three days later.

Georgia’s primary is slated next, on Feb. 13, with Michigan’s two weeks after that.

Most of the rest of the country would vote on Super Tuesday in early March — giving the earlier states an enormous say in which candidates make it that far.

But New Hampshire is threatenin­g to jump ahead, pointing to its law mandating that it hold the first presidenti­al primary — something Iowa has circumvent­ed for five decades because it holds caucuses.

And Georgia may not take its place in the new top five because Republican­s there have rejected calls to move their primary to Democrats’ new date.

Although South Carolina Democrats are set to go first, Republican­s there have delayed the GOP primary until three weeks later, on Feb. 24.

In Nevada, Republican­s have sued to maintain partyrun caucuses even as the state shifts to a primary system. Michigan has approved its date, but its Legislatur­e may need to adjourn early.

Iowa has proposed continuing to hold caucuses before primaries, and perhaps not releasing results until later to defer to new rules.

This year’s shakeup followed a meltdown at the 2020 Iowa caucuses, after which the state proposed allowing Democrats to submit their presidenti­al choices by mail rather than continuing to require in-person participat­ion.

Scott Brennan, an Iowa lawyer and member of the DNC’s rules committee, said his state “knew the deck was stacked” against it from the start of the calendar shakeup — but Democrats there have tried to avoid open defiance of national party plans.

“We’re trying to remain flexible as long as we can,” Brennan said, “to see if there’s a way to fix this.”

Republican­s still plan to lead their 2024 primary with Iowa’s caucuses; the state GOP could set its date next month. That would let the state’s Democrats schedule their caucuses, possibly with plans to hold the results.

Iowa Democrats hope their flexible attitude might help win back a spot in the party’s first five states, if Georgia and New Hampshire vacate their spots. Iowa would fill a potential gap between Nevada’s Feb. 6 vote and Michigan’s on Feb. 27; however, Roosevelt said such a scenario is unlikely.

“I give Iowa a lot of credit for trying to work flexibly,” he said. “If Iowa were to find a way to fully comply with the new rules, that would be considered. Frankly I think it’s too late for that.”

He noted that one reason the largely white state was moved from the No. 1 spot “was demographi­cs, and that’s not going to change.”

New Hampshire is striking a harsher tone, saying its Republican governor and GOP-controlled Legislatur­e won’t change the law that requires it to hold the nation’s first primary.

“We don’t have a choice to delay the primary. Maybe Iowa’s different,” said New

Hampshire Democratic National Committeem­an Bill Shaheen.

If New Hampshire moves forward with its plan to go first and Biden opts not to campaign there, one of his challenger­s may see a bump in support. That could be embarrassi­ng to the president, though his supporters point to polling showing the state’s primary is far from competitiv­e.

“I don’t think the DNC is going to do anything that’s going to change what we’re going to do,” Shaheen said. “We just don’t like getting pushed around much.”

Biden’s campaign has refused to discuss his primary challenger­s or whether they might be buoyed by an unsanction­ed New Hampshire primary. Iowa Democrats, in contrast, have suggested listing Biden among presidenti­al preference­s in their caucuses whether he campaigns there or not.

Redlawsk said the fact that Democrats have made it this far in their calendar shakeup means “the battle will continue, but I think it’s far more likely that change will now happen” and that the impact could be profound.

“These early states really do condition the campaign. The early states don’t guarantee a winner, but they tell us who is going to lose, at least in the first rounds,” Redlawsk said. “The winnowing is very likely to be different if the first state is South Carolina, or Nevada, or some combinatio­n, than if it were Iowa or New Hampshire.”

 ?? Susan Walsh Associated Press ?? PRESIDENT BIDEN, pictured last month, has the national Democratic Party’s support for overhaulin­g which states lead off the presidenti­al primaries. But implementi­ng the revamped order, intended to better ref lect a diverse voter base, has hit snags in multiple states.
Susan Walsh Associated Press PRESIDENT BIDEN, pictured last month, has the national Democratic Party’s support for overhaulin­g which states lead off the presidenti­al primaries. But implementi­ng the revamped order, intended to better ref lect a diverse voter base, has hit snags in multiple states.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States