Give other states a chance

The presidential primary debates are well underway and the candidates are scurrying about in three small states, hoping to secure the few electoral votes to be had. Recently, some presidential hopefuls have publicly objected to the idea of moving the primary date to position other states ahead of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, while sharing their excitement for Texas’ improved position in the contest. Though Texas’ position in 2016 is certainly better than election cycles past, there could be a better way to approach the presidential primary election process:  implement a wheel rotation process for states that hold these elections to ensure that no one state has undue influence on the electoral process.

To best illustrate why a rotating primary schedule would make sense, let’s explore the differences between the states currently positioned first and Texas, which is a microcosm of the nation as a whole, and represents far more delegates.

{mosads}Since 1988, Texas has participated in “Super Tuesday,” held the first Tuesday in March, while much smaller and homogenous states are first in the presidential primary lineup. By the time Texas voters have the opportunity to elect the candidate of their choice, the race is all but decided. The last time Texas mattered in this process was the 1976 primary between Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan.

Allowing Texas, and other more diverse and populous states to hold presidential primaries first, would result in a more robust discussion of issues facing millions of Americans by candidates in both parties. With Texas in first, many of the issues impacting the 26 million people in Texas that have largely been ignored by the federal government would finally be part of the national discussion. The candidates’ ideas on the issue of border security in the state with the largest border with Mexico would be part of the debate early on, along with immigration policy, carbon dioxide emission rules, national healthcare policy, the Keystone pipeline, and military and veteran issues would be front and center, instead of conversations dominated by ethanol subsidies and other myopic issues that exclusively affect residents of those early primary states.

Historically, national party organizations have threatened to penalize states that move their primary election dates ahead by reducing the number of their delegates and withholding guest passes for the national convention. However, Reince Priebus’ recent comments indicating that the Republican Party should consider adjusting the presidential primary schedule is encouraging.

Larger states that are better demographic representations of our nation should no longer tolerate playing second fiddle to states that are a fraction of their size and are far less impacted by federal government overreach and abdication of responsibilities. These states deserve to play a meaningful role in the process that elects our nation’s leader. It is time for both national parties to adopt a rotating schedule to ensure each state is given an opportunity to play a meaningful role in this process.

Larson has represented part of San Antonio in the Texas House of Representatives since 2011.