line -->
  • Sunday, August 26, 2007


    Money and Early Primaries

    Perhaps it's been covered but it seems to me the states seeking to have the earliest primaries are doing so for the money.

    Sure, there's the prestige but I think it's no coincidence that these are poorer or lower population states. If tourism is a big income for some states, I'm curious about what the impact financially is of an influx of reporters, political campaign workers, consultants, etc. does for a state. I'm sure this is a significant factor.

    A state like New Hampshire which loses its place as an early primary would probably also lose a great deal of money. Yes, this would be true anywhere but I'm suggesting that the percentage of money the primary brings into the state might be more than a slight boost; it might be significantly warping the motivations of the pols.

    Is this wrong or bad? I don't know, but it feels like bipartisan decision-making for cash rather than for the good of the body politic. I just have difficultly grasping the usefulness of this extended period between primaries and conventions.

    Labels: ,

    << Home

    This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?