New Hampshire's hallowed first-in-the-nation presidential primary could soon lose the prominence it has held for nearly a century if the Democratic National Committee passes a recent proposal to add one or two more caucuses before New Hampshire's primary date.
In an effort to choose a stronger candidate in 2008, the DNC has completed the preliminary steps necessary both to place one or two caucuses between Iowa and New Hampshire and to schedule several other primaries immediately after New Hampshire's. Democratic National Chairman Howard Dean has said that other caucuses would allow a more diverse population of voters to have a greater say in their presidential nominee.
Since 1920, New Hampshire has held the first primary in the nation, but at that time voters chose delegates rather than candidates. It was not until 1952 that candidates appeared directly on the ballot. In that year, a staggering 43 percent of eligible voters turned out to choose a candidate, garnering nationwide attention for the small New England state. Since then, New Hampshire's primary has seen consistently high voter turnout rates.
New Hampshire government officials took their first steps to resist encroachment on their prominent status in 1977 when they passed legislation that the New Hampshire primary must be held one week before any primary in New England. Soon after, state officials expanded this law to require that the primary be held "seven days or more" before any other primary in the nation.
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) is the first possible presidential contender for 2008 to announce his support for New Hampshire's privileged status. Kerry criticized those who suggested that the current system prevents greater minority participation in the presidential nominee selection process, saying that New Hampshire Democrats are sensitive to minority issues.
"It's kind of a twisted argument that is unbecoming of the Democratic Party," Kerry said.
New Hampshire has long been hailed for its high voter turnout and balance between registered Republicans, Democrats and Independents, a reputation that has contributed to the current showdown between New Hampshire and the Democratic party.
But despite New Hampshire's storied election history, some Dartmouth students following the debate, many of whom do not come from New Hampshire, are open to the DNC's proposal.
"Given that the DNC has much larger national objectives, they are trying to put a candidate out there that can win a presidential election. If changing the primary system in the way it has been proposed will do that, then we'll have to go along with that," Vice President of the Young Democrats Mike Heslin '08 said.
New Hampshire Secretary of State William Gardner, a Democrat, has promised to schedule the New Hampshire primary as early as possible to preserve the first-in-the-nation tradition in accordance with state law. If New Hampshire chooses to ignore the DNC, its delegates could be denied seats at the nominating convention, although some experts think that is unlikely to occur.
"I think New Hampshire will do what it takes in order to be the first primary and to keep as much of the spotlight on itself as possible," director of the Nelson A. Rockefeller Center Andrew Samwick speculated. "The Democratic Party will acquiesce to most of what New Hampshire asks of it."
While the DNC proposal would partially erode New Hampshire's influence in choosing the Democratic presidential nominee, the Granite State would still remain a swing state and should therefore continue to receive candidate attention.
"More than anything, our campus is politically vibrant because we have a lot of intelligent and active students, and I don't think that even changing the New Hampshire primary or adding other caucuses will change that," Heslin said.