Some of my British and Spanish friends have asked me to explain the perpetual campaign (or is it a circus?) that has been going on in the U.S. this year. Isn’t the election supposed to be in November? What have they been voting on ever since January?
First, some background. The basic rules for the election of the President, the Senators, and the Congressional Representatives, are laid out in the U.S. Constitution. What is not specified in the constitution is any procedure for selecting the candidates who will run for these offices. The system that we see operating in overdrive this year has evolved gradually during the past 220 years. These primaries and caucuses -- like the camel and the duck-billed platypus -- are the products of evolution.
In the early days of the U.S., candidates for President were selected at national conventions, attended by delegates from each state’s party organizations, as well as other key members of the parties. These conventions still take place today. This year, the Democratic Convention will be held on August 25-28 in the city of Denver, Colorado. The Republican Convention is scheduled for September 1-4 in the “twin cities” of Minneapolis and Saint Paul, Minnesota. (There will also be conventions of some half dozen smaller parties, such as the Green Party and the Libertarian Party. The numbers in these parties are too small to influence the national election, so they are generally ignored by the media. You can find their convention schedules by using Google. You are not likely to see much about them in the newspapers or on television.) In modern times, the choice of the presidential nominees is usually a fait acompli by the time of the Conventions. The Conventions merely confirm the nominations, with much hoop-la and at vast expense.
I’ve been asked why some states hold “primaries” while others have “caucuses”? What’s the difference? There is no answer to the question “why.” The parties in each state simply choose the method they prefer.
Primary elections, in the 40 or so states that hold them, are run in the same format as general elections, with direct voting by secret ballot. Most states using primaries have “closed” primaries, meaning that you must be a registered member of a party to vote in its primary. A few states have “open” primaries, allowing voters to vote in any party’s primary (but only one).
Odd situations can arise with either type. In “open” primaries, members of one party have a chance, if they feel so inclined, to try to “sabotage” the selection process of the other party by voting for the candidates who would be easiest for their own party to defeat in November. As for “closed” primaries, here is how some friends of mine deal with a closed primary. Although they are Democrats at heart, these friends register to vote as Republicans. Why? Because in the voting district where they live, Republicans have an unbeatable majority. It is a foregone conclusion in that district that the winner of the Republican primary will win the Congressional seat in the November election. My friends’ only chance to influence the choice of Congressman from their district is to vote in the Republican primary for whichever Republican candidate they find least objectionable. In November they will vote for the Democrat, of course, but that vote will be an ineffectual token in a district that is overwhelmingly Republican. I should mention that not all voting districts are so unbalanced. In many there is a true contest in the November general elections.
Caucuses, in the states that use this method, are run less like elections and more like forums or discussion groups. Local caucuses elect and send delegates to county caucuses which, in turn, elect and send delegates to state caususes and thence to the national Convention. My favorite explanation of the workings of a caucus is found in Lewis Carroll’s “Alice in Wonderland.” The Dodo proposed that the creatures should hold a caucus race. Alice asked, “What is a caucus race?” The Dodo replied, “The best way to explain it is to do it.” They began running when they liked and left off when they liked, so that it was not easy to know when the race was over. . . . At last the Dodo said, “Everybody has won, and all must have prizes!”
When you see in the news that the voters in the various primaries and caucuses have voted for Barack Obama or for Hillary Clinton, this is not strictly accurate. They have voted for delegates who are pledged to vote for these candidates at the upcoming Conventions. In addition to these pledged delegates, each state party organization sends a certain number of un-pledged delegates to their Convention (called “super-delegates” by the media). These un-pledged delegates are designated by party rules, and may, for example, include the state governor, or the state’s congressional representatives, and other party officials. The un-pledged delegates are free to support any candidate.
A Convention that opens without a clear winner is called a “brokered” or “contested” Convention. If no winner emerges from the early ballots at the Convention, the rivals may have to negotiate. This puts real suspense into the Convention. The last time that a Convention offered high drama was in 1960. That year, there was a Titanic struggle for the nomination between John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson. When Johnson was offered the vice-presidential slot on the ticket, so the story goes, his response was not fit to be printed. In the end, of course, Johnson’s only choice was Vice President or nothing. He accepted to be Kennedy’s running-mate, and the rest is history. Will this year’s Conventions be half so exciting?
by Mary Gowland
