Democrats getting serious about adding early caucuses

WASHINGTON – A plan to shuffle the 2008 Democratic presidential calendar – placing several states between the traditional Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary – is gaining momentum on a commission studying the party’s nominating process.

A consensus is developing to recommend scheduling nominating contests in two or possibly three states in the days between Iowa and New Hampshire, according to some members of a Democratic National Committee panel looking at ways to revamp the nominating schedule.

“It is getting to be a done deal,” said Mike Stratton, a member of the 40-person commission, which is expected to make a final recommendation to the DNC at its Dec. 10 meeting.

If such a recommendation were adopted, it likely would diminish the influence of two small states that for decades have enjoyed outsized influence in picking presidential nominees, and would cause aspiring presidential candidates to rethink their strategies in pursuit of the nomination.

Some proponents of a new calendar say adding caucuses rather than primaries in states voting immediately after Iowa would be consistent with a New Hampshire state law that mandates the Granite State’s primary be held at least one week before any “similar” nominating election. This would allow both Iowa and New Hampshire to claim that each preserved elements of their coveted first-in-the-nation status, while bowing to critics who have long complained that the traditional calendar is unfair to other states.

New Hampshire loyalists regard their first-primary status as something close to a divine franchise. They say letting a small state go first allows voters to inspect the presidential merchandise in person, gives underfunded candidates a chance to shine and filters out unimpressive candidates early in the process.

The DNC’s Commission on Presidential Timing and Scheduling was inspired by a dispute in early 2003 when Michigan Democrats sought unsuccessfully to overthrow the privileged status of New Hampshire, saying the state should not have sole claim to the national attention and economic advantages conferred by hosting the first primary of the presidential race.