January 8th it is!

So we again preserve the first-in-the-nation-primary status of the New Hampshire primaries. This drama has been going on for two years now. The Democratic party at the national level has been trying to have a more "balanced" early primary season, which more accurately reflects the demographics of the US. The logical part of me of course agrees with that. But the New Hampshire resident part of me does not - it is way too much to live in a state with the first-in-the-nation-primary! No way we are giving that up :) The local newspapers have closely followed the attempt to reduce the importance of New Hampshire, with many editorials devoted to how the New Hampshire's town hall style campaigning is critical to the political process, and how New Hampshire voters are so well-informed. All true, I think :)

The process of setting the date rests in the hands of the New Hampshire Secretary of State, Bill Gardner. New Hampshire has a law that states that we have to go before everyone else - interesting law, because it can get difficult to implement it by ourselves :) A few months ago, everyone started leap-frogging, much to our alarm. The Democratic party chose to have the Nevada caucuses on January 19th (the then tentative New Hampshire primary date was January 22nd or so), though after some thought that seemed OK. It was just a caucus after all. But then Florida moved ahead, Michigan declared a move to January 15th, and all major states (California, New York, etc.) moved their primary to February 5, after which the primaries would virtually be over. If we were too close to the day when practically every other state voted, we would lose our influence. But where could we move to? Every Tuesday seemed to be taken up. There was talking of holding the New Hampshire primary in December, and national newspapers lamented that voters might be going to the polls along with Christmas carolers. As a local newspaper cartoon put it beautifully - in a picture of leap-frogging frogs, the Iowa frog tells the New Hampshire frog - "I don't know about you, but we are holding our elections today!".

Iowa finally set its caucuses to be on January 3rd, and New Hampshire chose January 8th. It is a bit too close to Iowa's caucuses - a full week would be nice - but at least we are preserving the order which New Hampshire residents think is their birthright :) Iowa holds caucuses, while New Hampshire holds a primary, which more accurately reflects the general election. Also in New Hampshire voters registered as independents can vote in the primary, so a result in New Hampshire can reflect the mood of voters who are independents. Iowa's caucuses are always held first, followed by the first-in-the-nation-primary in New Hampshire.

The elections are beginning too close to the holidays, and are way too compressed. But as a New York Times columnist put it, yet again we have managed to keep the critical phase of electing a new president in the preserve of some very, very special people who live in very, very special places :)