Let's act to create a Super Tuesday of the North

Mike Erlandson ad Annette Meeks
March 14, 2005
Star Tribune

Ten years ago Secretary of State Joan Growe led a bipartisan commission to develop ideas that could strengthen and improve the health of Minnesota's democracy. The report of that very successful commission urged moving Minnesota's primary elections from their current mid-September date to June.

Legislation on a June primary, often referred to as the "Growe Commission" proposal, has passed the state Senate several times, including in 1996, 1997 and 2000. Similar reform legislation, which proposed moving precinct caucuses from March to February to give Minnesota a stronger voice in selecting presidential nominees, passed the Senate in 2003 but was not taken up in the House.

Both the DFL and Republican parties of Minnesota, Gov. Tim Pawlenty and legislative leaders agreed two years ago that the time had come to move forward with the Growe Commission proposals. Both of us personally have worked in a nonpartisan manner lobbying for this legislation over the last several years. The time has come to take this positive step forward and improve the democratic process in our great state.

At present, we have a seven-week general election campaign preceded by intraparty primary battles that often last two years. Most voters are not interested in intraparty competitions, where the differences between candidates on the issues are all but imperceptible to many voters. It is in the general election where clear policy differences arise and a robust debate about the future course of our state and nation occurs.

A June primary would benefit our democracy in many ways, but a profound and important improvement that would occur is that candidates would spend more time talking to voters about their positions on the broad issues that affect all Minnesotans. It would improve political discourse by giving more time for the dissemination of information about the policy positions and beliefs of the political parties and their candidates.

Candidates would spend more time talking to voters about their positions on the myriad issues that affect Minnesota, in contrast to the current long primary and party endorsement campaigns in which intraparty policy debates take precedence.

We'll be holding state and federal elections 20 months from now. Under the current timetable for a primary election, candidates will spend 18 of those 20 months on internal party caucuses, debates, and primaries. Minnesota voters would be better served by hearing the policy differences between the parties' candidates rather than confining this debate to 6,000 party faithful representing the two major parties.

Another democracy-enhancing reform would move the date of precinct caucuses -- the organizational meetings that form the structure of both of our parties -- from the first Tuesday of March to the third Tuesday in February. What benefit would come from moving the caucus date only a few weeks? Much.

In 2004 nearly 60,000 attended DFL caucuses -- up substantially from previous years. This was due to years of effort by party leaders to speed up and simplify the caucus process for new participants and the incredible energy that comes with a competitive presidential campaign.

Minnesota Republicans experienced a similar surge in caucus attendance in 2000 when a vigorous campaign between then-Gov. George Bush and Sen. John McCain captured our attention. Both parties believe that much of this renewed electoral enthusiasm came from the thousands of college students who attended caucuses for their first time, energized by their respective presidential candidates.

By moving caucuses to the third week of February -- just four weeks after the first presidential test in Iowa -- Minnesota would join with Wisconsin to create a "Super Tuesday of the North" -- sort of a frozen version of the presidential sweepstakes. With this change, in 2008, our presidential preference "straw ballots" would take on new and heightened relevance. And Minnesotans of all political stripes would be able to hear from and ask questions of presidential contenders -- one heck of an improvement over the hurried airport rallies and presidential surrogates that we've settled for in the past. Such a move would give Minnesotans a much stronger voice over whom the political parties select as their nominees and would be an important factor in increasing awareness and public participation in the nominating process.

This benefit of having presidential aspirants campaigning in person -- not just purchasing paid, political advertising -- would be transformative. Both of us learned from the 2004 presidential election one very important lesson -- Minnesotans are eager, willing and able to volunteer at the grass-roots level.

Currently, thousands of Minnesota Democrats and Republicans head down to Iowa every four years to volunteer for presidential campaigns. The unprecedented level of interest generated by both the Minnesota Bush and Kerry campaigns should propel the Legislature to move the caucuses to February to ensure that this energy isn't exported once again to Iowa.

But most importantly and contrary to popular notion, a longer period between the primary and the November general should serve to heighten the political debate. A more thoughtful and inclusive approach to selecting our political leaders at all levels will surely occur if a less frantic general election season becomes law.

A battle is on in our state -- a battle that, in future elections, will determine the public policy direction of Minnesota. We would be well-served to make these changes -- changes we believe will strengthen and improve our democracy in Minnesota.

Mike Erlandson is chair of the DFL Party in Minnesota and an aide to Rep. Martin Sabo, D-Minn.; Annette Meeks is a vice chair of the Republican Party of Minnesota and CEO of the Center of the American Experiment.

-Mike Erlandson is chair of the DFL Party in Minneosta and an aide to Rep. martin Sabo, D-Minn; Annette Meeks is vice chair of the Republican Party of Minnesota and CEO of Center of the American Experiment.

Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted.