Caucus follies
“Caucus” might as well be a four-letter word. Nevada’s presidential nomination system is about as popular as traffic jams and the stomach flu, given last weekend’s lousy execution by the Republican Party.
If there’s any consolation for the Nevada GOP, it’s that Iowa blew its caucus, too, by actually reporting the wrong winner.
The embarrassment caused by a two-day delay in reporting official Nevada results, a lack of statewide consistency in how precinct meetings were carried out and a controversial nighttime caucus has political leaders here talking about switching to a primary system.
The flaws of the caucus system have been well-documented by now. The neighborhood meetings take a couple of hours and offer voters no flexibility in when they can participate. Those who work on Saturday mornings or have other obligations can’t cast ballots in the early morning or late afternoon — they don’t get to vote at all. And the inefficient manner in which volunteers count the votes invites complaints of favoritism and fraud from losing candidates.
In a primary, the state would run the election, as opposed to the political parties. Voting machines would be used, bringing greater integrity to the process and ensuring speedy, accurate reporting of results. Voters would be able to cast their ballots anytime, all day, and sacrifice just a few minutes of their time.
This is not just a Republican problem. Democrats had plenty of complaints following their 2008 caucus as well.
The sticking point: the cost. Would Nevada taxpayers be willing to cough up more than $1 million every four years to change a process relatively few people participate in, anyway? Remember, Nevada experimented with a presidential primary, but switched to a caucus in 1984 because low turnout didn’t justify the cost.
Elections are an essential function of government. And taxpayers already pay for primary elections to determine general election candidates for Congress, governor, the Legislature and other state and local offices.
But given the state’s already stretched finances, switching to a publicly funded presidential primary smacks of rewarding dysfunction. Let the parties learn from their mistakes and figure out how to improve the caucus process. And if they still want to switch to a primary, make them pay for it.