Tuesday was primary election day here in Kentucky.  Voters across the Commonwealth cast their votes for their representatives in the General Assembly and Congress, as well as in many local races.  Voters also were able to cast votes in the Democratic and Republican primaries for President, despite the fact that those races were decided many months ago.  As a result, Kentuckians had no say in the presidential nominating process.  Voters understand this.  That’s why most of them stayed home.

We aren’t alone in being left out.  About half of the states still hadn’t conducted primaries by the time Senator John Kerry obtained enough delegates to secure the Democratic nomination.    

This nominating process is broken and is in sore need of a solution.  One potential solution that should be examined is the one proposed by my colleagues around the country in the National Association of Secretaries of State – the Regional Rotating Primary Plan.

Under this bipartisan proposal, the nation would be divided into four regions, and each region would hold its primaries or caucuses in different months, March, April, May or June. The regions would rotate positions among the four months every four years to give each region regular opportunities to receive the early spotlight. In deference to tradition, early primary/caucus states New Hampshire and Iowa retain early election status so that under-funded and less widely known candidates would still have an opportunity to compete through retail one-on-one politics as opposed to the costly media-driven campaigns that many larger states require.

Another solution for a national primary would feature all states’ primaries on one day.  This option would actually exacerbate many of the problems that the country’s presidential primary system currently faces.  Big-money candidates would thrive under this plan with media-driven campaigns the only option for candidates.  States with larger populations would receive most of the attention from presidential hopefuls as candidates seek to maximize their return on investment of campaign dollars.  Kentucky would more than likely still play a minor role with this particular proposal.

Alternatively, the Regional Rotating Primary Plan creates a primary system where candidates visit smaller states and place a high value on important regional issues.  Lesser known and funded candidates thrive in this proposal because it emphasizes grass-roots political organizing rather than paid media.  Most importantly, every state’s involvement and their delegates become essential to any strategy to win the nomination.

Nationally, the Regional Rotating Primary Plan poses some challenges, not the least of which would be securing the approval of fifty state legislatures.  Here in Kentucky, we would be forced to either move our primary election to our assigned month or hold two primaries.  Additional elections are costly, and it’s hard enough to find poll workers for the number of elections we currently hold.  Of course, we could always switch to a caucus format and ask the parties to pick up the tab. 

Regardless, these challenges are not insurmountable and certainly should not prevent us from debating the plan’s merits, which are many.  For too long, Kentuckians have had to watch the presidential primaries from the sidelines.  The Regional Rotating Primary Plan will help us get back in the game.