The Regional Lottery System
The Regional Lottery System |
|
At the National Symposium on Presidential Selection in the spring of 2001, Center for Governmental Studies founder and director Larry Sabato proposed a regional lottery system:
This plan divides the United States into four regions (identical to those in the Rotating Presidential Primary Plan). States in each region hold their nominating events in successive months, beginning in March and running through June. It is similar to the Presidential Primary Plan proposed by the NASS, but there are two key differences: the order of regions holding nominating events is determined by a lottery, and there are no lead-off states.
Because it is a state-based system, each state will have the right to choose between a primary election and a caucus. To encourage the caucus system, which is cheaper to organize and assists in party-building, Sabato proposes that caucus states be first out of the gate--on the first of the month, followed by primaries on the fifteenth.
The Regional Lottery System also enjoys many of the same advantages as the Rotating Presidential Primary Plan, but the key to this plan is the lottery used to determine the order each region will participate in the nominating process. Because candidates are unable to know more than a few months in advance which region will lead off the calendar, homesteading is eliminated and candidates are forced to focus equally on all areas. (Center for Governmental Studies 2001, 22)
During the Symposium, Craig Smith, campaign manager for Al Gore’s 2000 presidential campaign, “recommended creating a second lottery to pick two small states to begin the contest, as Iowa and New Hampshire do now.... This lottery would include all states and the District of Columbia with electoral votes no greater than a predetermined number--for example, seven--but it would not include island territories.” The Regional Lottery Primary System has subsequently been endorsed by the Center for Governmental Studies. Table 21 and Figure 46 show a possible schedule for 2004. Figure 47 and Figure 48 are corresponding political and geographic maps.
This plan treats the regions of the country equally, randomly placing them in the schedule from one quadrennial cycle to the next. For those who object to the historic prerogatives enjoyed by Iowa and New Hampshire, this plan substitutes two other small states at the front of the process by random selection.
Except in the first two states selected, this plan obliterates any possibility of grass roots campaigning by dividing the country into four regions of roughly equal population. In each of these stages, candidates would have to have the money and organization to reach one-quarter of the nation’s electorate. Only the most well-funded candidates would be able to compete, thus the field would be very quickly narrowed to two or possibly three candidates in each party.
In any given presidential election year, one region of the country is favored over all others by being placed first in the schedule. This raises the specter of the presidency devolving upon a succession of regional favorite sons rather than on the best choice for the nation as a whole. This may delegitimate the office of president, as incumbents are by turns viewed by the people as “the South’s president” or “the West’s president.”
Compared to the Regional Lottery System, the Graduated Random System allows a much more gradual ramp-up in the extent and expense of campaigning. Grass roots campaigns with shoestring budgets would be competitive through several election intervals, giving them time to gather momentum. This opens the process to the widest field of candidates, giving the American voter more choices and a longer time to deliberate.
Like the Regional Lottery System, the Graduated Random System involves a random process for determining the position of each state in the schedule; however, while the Regional Lottery Primary System gives an overwhelming advantage to one particular region in a given presidential year, the Graduated Random System picks individual states at random rather than whole regions, bringing more regional balance to the system.