Editorial: Nonevent in Iowa is new reality

The Iowa Republican presidential straw poll was held Saturday and the first casualty was former Tennessee Gov. Lamar Alexander, who dropped out of the race Monday following his poor showing. While it's safe to assume the political pundits' prattling will go on for days about who were the straw poll's biggest winners and losers, they are failing to see the big picture. What is disturbing is that a marginal beauty contest -- no delegates to the Republican National Convention were at stake -- can actually winnow the number of presidential candidates.

At first glance, the seriousness accorded this event by the media and candidates doesn't make sense. For starters, this wasn't exactly democracy since each "voter" had to pay $25 for the privilege of casting his ballot, a cost absorbed by the campaigns. In addition, scant national attention has been paid in the past to the Iowa straw poll since it has a poor track record: Not once has a Republican who has won the Iowa straw poll gone on to win the White House.

So why did such a nonevent cause a commotion among candidates and political commentators this time? The main reason is that the 2000 presidential election season is starting much sooner than in previous elections, with many states holding their primaries earlier, prompting the media and contributors to focus on straw polls as possible predictors of success. States that haven't had a role to play in electing a party's presidential nominee, because their contests come at the end of the primary season when the nominations are virtually sewn up, now want to be at the head of the pack. So California moved its primary date to March 7 to coincide with New York, and a number of other Western states are eyeing March 10 to leapfrog past the so-called "Super Tuesday" primary on March 14 that includes Texas, Florida and other Southern states.

With all the biggest prizes now lumped together so soon at the beginning of the primary season, the candidates must jockey for position in straw polls preceding the primaries -- even if the polls aren't accurate political barometers. This bundling of primaries gives a boost to campaigns that very early build huge campaign warchests, a triumph of money over ideas. Increasingly the big campaign contributors are drowning out the input the public has in selecting a president.

It's too late to do anything about the 2000 election, but the states should now explore adopting a reform for the 2004 presidential election that is being advocated by the states' chief elections officers. They believe there should be five regional primaries, each taking place one month apart. To ensure that no region has a permanent advantage, the order of the regional primaries would be rotated every four years to offer fairness. This would restore order to what is now chaos and make for a rational presidential nominating process. Most importantly, the public would win under a more deliberate political schedule, offering all Americans an equal voice in helping determine who the next president should be.

archive