Head Strong | Be patient about moving the Pa. primary forward

 

By Michael Smerconish

 

June 24, 2007

 

Leapfrog.

 

That's an apt metaphor for the juvenile way states are jumping one another to schedule their presidential primaries. Here's hoping Pennsylvania chooses to sit out this game of one-upmanship.

 

The state's 2008 primary is now scheduled for April 22. Three pieces of legislation (two in the state House and one in the state Senate) aimed at moving the election forward now sit in legislative committees. Their fate is uncertain, as is whether any change would occur in time for 2008, or would begin in 2012. Those wishing to adjust the calendar have an important ally in Gov. Rendell, who recently opined: "I do not believe that Pennsylvanians should be left out of this process, so I support advancing Pennsylvania's primary in 2008 to Feb. 5, which will join us with our sister industrial states."

 

But it's not just industrial states that will vote on Feb. 5: As many as 23 states may go to the polls on that one day, including New Jersey and Delaware. Only Iowa's caucus (Jan. 14), New Hampshire's primary (Jan. 22), and now, Florida's primary (Jan. 29), will occur sooner. Florida moved forward despite threats from the national parties to reduce by half the number of Sunshine State delegates at the national nominating conventions. Why did Florida take that risk? Because recently, the only thing more irrelevant than national conventions are late presidential primaries!

 

Yet I still say Pennsylvania should resist the temptation.

 

The question is how to make our votes count. Those who seek to have Keystone State ballots cast in February or March argue that, since the nominees will be determined before April, only by voting sooner will state residents play a role in the outcome. That's the conventional wisdom.

 

Then again, so many states have already made that move that Pennsylvania would not distinguish itself by simply joining the scrum. It would become one of many, instead of standing alone.

 

Sure, our local network affiliates would get an added media buy, and the candidates themselves would be obligated to make high-profile visits to the state's media pockets looking for votes, not just money.

 

But it won't increase the amount of substantive dialogue or personal interaction with candidates in our state. They'll run ads. They'll give a few speeches in the southeast and in Pittsburgh, before quickly flying on to Illinois, New York and California. The closest we'll all come to getting personal will be the interruption of the dinner hour by a telephone push-poll. And when we vote, our tally will get added to that of 20-plus other states. In all likelihood, we will play a bit role in determining the nominees.

 

But what if all is not determined on Feb. 5? What if the GOP remains a horse race between Giuliani and Thompson? Or if Clinton and Obama are still deadlocked come Feb. 6? Perhaps a candidate will pick up a head of steam in February only to have a Muskie meltdown or Dean scream in March. Then where are we? We will have sacrificed our kingmaker's role for expediency and will now sit back on the sidelines while the race is determined in Texas and Ohio.

 

How do we position ourselves to have a say, as we did for the Democrats in 1976 or the Republicans in 1980? The latter was the first year I was eligible to vote. That year, the primary was also on April 22, and I had just turned 18. As of then, California Gov. Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush were still in a close battle for the GOP nomination. I met both of them at campaign stops the closeness of the race had made obligatory. Reagan came to the Italian Market on Ninth Street in Philadelphia, and Bush paid respects at the Shrine of Czestochowa in Doylestown.

 

I heard both speak. I shook their hands. I looked into their eyes. I watched their mannerisms. In short, I formed opinions about each man based on something other than TV coverage and commercials. Each spent time in the state, with field organizations and campaign headquarters, position papers (pre-Internet), and surrogate speakers advancing their views.

 

In 1980, I got to take the same kind of up close and personal look that Iowa and New Hampshire residents have long enjoyed, which enables them to ferret out candidates' flaws. It was this type of encounter, no doubt, that caused Winston Churchill to observe that "nothing so tests the character of an individual as the running of an election." He surely did not envision the superficiality that reigns today.

 

Maybe the days I yearn for are over. And yes, the odds are that the nominations will be a wrap before April 22. But maybe, just maybe, it won't all end in a flash. I say we keep our powder dry, and my campaign to keep our primary date even has a slogan: Too Late for '08.

Michael Smerconish's column appears on Thursdays in the Daily News and on Sundays in Currents. Michael holds forth from 5:30 to 9 a.m. weekdays on "The Big Talker," WPHT-AM (1210). Contact him at http://www.mastalk.com.